I am educated and 83 years old. I'm still in good mental and physical shape. Nonetheless, my capacities have diminished since my capacities are not what they were, 5,10,15 years ago. I am too old to do what I used to do. Bernie is clearly too old to be President.
387
@e phillips You are not Bernie. Besides, he will surround himself with competent and progressive people who will all work as diligently as Bernie has. Please don't bring up the age issue. But if you must consider it, then vote for Yang.
69
@e phillips speak for yourself. Bernie is not too old, and he's wise enough to seek good young advisors.
53
Grandpa,
Tell that to the millions who are sending him their lunch money willingly and joyfully.
May you and him both live to be a hundred, healthy and happy. And let dear Bernie whom I love like a blood relative bless us by becoming our president.
He is the best Mensch out there.
72
Yes, Bernie can't win. Neither could a Black community organizer with a Muslim name. Nor a pathological liar who confessed to sexually assaulting women.
The center doesn't hold anymore. Reagan started to kill it, Clinton went along, and Bush put the nail in the coffin. Obviously, some decent but very comfortable people (you, Mr. Egan?) think the same old same old is fine, without the rough, bigoted edges. But that is no longer where the American people are at.
Unfortunately, Bernie, clearly a social democrat, confuses things by calling himself a socialist, but Americans by and large are not intellectually picky. They just want out with the old, which isn't working.
By a Bernie/Elizabeth supporter (they support the same things, despite how they "brand" themselves)
358
@Peter Wolf If we weren't stuck with the Electoral College, I think Bernie or Elizabeth could very well win. But I read recently that Trump could lose the popular vote by as much as 7 million and still win the EC. That is a dismal prospect.
70
@Peter Wolf Good points. No one knows who could win at this point. And beware of journalists fond of using terms like "never". I feel that is professional malpractice, and a clue that this article needs to be taken with a grain of salt.
Bernie could avoid to some extent the baggage of tags like socialism (or communism, which is also inevitable), by emphasize his actual policies, which are popular or can be, and push back against labels.
I do worry about his age and the seeming dogmatic approach that Bernie takes, not his policies so much. I appreciate his commitment, but i wish he could pair that with a better ability to listen and reflect people's concerns about his policies in a more thoughtful way.
25
@Peter Wolf
None of those two that you mentioned had to face the overwhelming LIE machine that the second one of those two employs to do even the most basic of his bidding. The second one of those two told a lie about the first one for years but it was during an era when almost no one believed him. Now almost half the country hangs on his every word. So I would say that Sanders will be blitzed in horrible ways by that second person's nearly unstoppable LIE apparatus.
23
I agree that Bernie would be a punching bag for the right. But imagine if Jesus actually returned and ran against Trump; the conservative smear machine would be unleashed:
"This commie overturns currency traders' tables!"
"He gives away free fish and bread to the hungry !"
"His trick of making wine out of water will destroy our hard working vintners' livelihoods!"
"If he can really can cure the sick; you can kiss your health insurance goodbye! "
He coddles those takers, like those homeless shepherds who live in the fields with their flocks!"
" He's been known to criticize lying hypocrites and false prophets, like our beloved Jerry Falwell!'
"And, not only that, He's a pacifist!"
29
Timothy Egan has a Federer-level backhand.
14
Oh Boy. Pretty sure Mr. Egan said Hillary can't lose.
24
A lot of people thought Donald Trump couldn't win in 2016.
19
You are wrong. That's what they said about trump.
22
I am gonna send Bernie some money in the hope that he will win the nomination. Then his ashes will be scattered to the winds as the Trump juggernaut rolls over his unrealistic, socialist nonsense campaign.
14
Can't win? Didn't people say the same thing about Trump? Then what happened???
16
The use of the term “class loathing”, is a deliberately provocative right wing term.
It reminds me of Maggie Thatcher when she coined the term “the politics of envy”, when addressing working class disgruntlement as they watched her government strip away the social safety net and break the unions.
I would expect the NYT to be more evolved than that.
Perhaps instead of stoking fear with such inflammatory terms, you could actually look at the disenfranchisement of the middle and working classes over the last forty years and write about how Sanders is trying to help.
31
I've been saying the same for months to any who would listen. Nor can Elizabeth Warren win. They will get shredded. Leaves only Buttigieg, Klobuchar, or Biden, and I seriously doubt Biden can win either.
6
If you're going to put up a Social Democrat or ultra left candidate against Trump to offset the Moderate Democrat malaise we've seen with Gore Kerry & HRC then it should at least be someone likeable. Putting aside all the blowhard policies that would never go anywhere and lack specifics - he's just loud angry and annoying. I'm sorry but Bernie appeals to no one outside of his core base.
Being grumpy isn't endearing to most people. Shouting instead of talking while poking your finger in the air every time you're asked a question during a debate isn't inspiring it's obnoxious.
Bernie Sanders' life long ambition to be America's working class hero is not worth risking the election. And please don't give me the argument about Bernie beating Trump in national polls. It's a major risk and we all know it. This is something that the country just cannot afford. The guy's not Springsteen or John Lennon. Heck even AOC would get more votes...Wake UP!!!
25
I’m reading all the comments and I keep seeing people congratulating Egan for taking on the “fearsome” “Bernie Bros.”
Then I look for the predicted frothing at the mouth, deranged, orthodox, name-calling Bernie Bro comments, and I can’t seem to find any.
Perhaps Sanders supporters are just like everyone else. Except more numerous and more casually slandered by centrist Dems, it seems.
22
You never said you'd support Bernie if he's the nominee. Please clarify.
Unfortunately, the NYT oped page is so ideologically pure in its embrace of neoliberalism (or neocons like Stephens) that progressive, Sanders-supporting columnists are not welcome... Yet.
But if Bernie defeats your falling-sky predictions as millions of voters suspect, the Krugmans, Friedmans, Egans and other longtime neoliberal pontificators of the world may have to finally exit stage right after getting another major election wrong.
You say we're not a socialist country, yet our most popular programs by a mile are both socialist: Social Security and Medicare.
Time and again, your paper cherry-picks polls on Medicare for All -- yet more polls than your example show not only it's resoundingly popular, but that when you explain that higher taxes will cost far less than premiums, deductibles and other insurance taxes we pay, any wavering tends to reverse itself.
It's only when you mislead about M4A that it polls poorly.
You ignore the successes of literally every other major country's single-payer-type healthcare system -- let alone that we're the only one left fully privatized, paying 2x what everyone else pays, with worse results.
Finally, you fail to acknowledge that every vanilla "centist" presidential candidate we've run -- Hillary, Kerry, Gore, Dukakis -- has gone down in flames. Obama and Bill won because they ran progressive campaigns, though later governed as centrists.
Please wake up.
30
Ya know, for 40 years we in the Democratic wing of the Democratic part have been told over and over that we must close ranks and hold our noses and vote for one conservative Wall Street Democrat after another to at least stop the Party of the Republic (fascist), from making things even worse.
And maybe, just maybe, we might get the ball moved a few inches as a sop to us.
My question to you, Mr Egan, and all your ilk, all the "Clinton Bros" and "Obama Bros" is, are you willing to close ranks and do the same when we have a once in a lifetime candidate of our own?
25
Correction: I made a comment in which I said FDR was re-elected in 1932, when I meant 1936. Sorry!
2
Readers wonder again whether all NYTimes op-ed personnel understand that any resident pundit who wholeheartedly endorses Bernie Sanders will simply be shown the door?
13
NYT pundits can't predict elections. Just look at Mr. Egan's column from 11-4-2016 when he talks about the challenges that will be facing "madame president" once she's elected. That's just one of many hubris laden prognostications that were so presumptuous and wrong on this page back in November of 2016. All this piece proves is that Mr. Egan has learned nothing in four whole years and is nonetheless willing to trumpet his out of touch arguments as fact.
18
Four years ago, all you prognosticating pundits assured us "Trump Can't Win."
How'd that work out, Tim?
17
OK, read headline & skimmed. Again, as I've said: keep on doing this, NYT. "Class loathing," eh? Senator Sanders is great on grudges? Neither of those really worth responding to, per se.
Instead of all the subtle (!) bias--why don't you, Editorial Board and several pundits on the payroll, just come & admit: yes, we report Trump's misdeeds with eager indignation; but, secretly, in a weird way (and I'd say this is more about psychology than economics/class warfare)--we like our old New York pal! Must be. Go on, get him elected again.
I'm cancelling my subscription after the primary.
14
Nonsense. Republicans have won on class loathing for decades.
16
Way back to early 2016: "Donald Trump can't win". Hey, the front page of the NYT told me in that famous graphic with Hillary trouncing The Donald up to election day, every day.
How did that work out?
Please wake up and accept the fact that America despises Washington D.C., and almost all media outlets. They are pulling levers in November as a protest. They certainly could care less what you think, Mr. Egan, but, dont take that personally, I sort of like your perspective at times, but, with this, you are way off.
12
My question is how Trump voters adore such a despicable man who is a stooge to an enemy nation. Do they truly hate "the other side" that much? Aren't we all Americans or is Fox now controlling the mindset of the nation?
5
Right, go "Republican lite" again.
8
Good job Timmy, you literally used the same sensationalist headline David Frum used in The Atlantic a few days ago. Bernie can win, or you coastal elites wouldn't be writing pieces like this.
You mean can't as in "we can't allow him to because it would be disastrous for people like us," not "can't beat Trump," am I correct?
9
Can we learn from History ? History as taught by Trump's own pollster ?
From the Independent, UK
"When asked what would happen during a Sanders-Trump match-up, Fabrizio replied, “I think Sanders beats Trump.”
“I think Sanders would have had the ability to reach a lot of the less than college-educated, low-income white voters,” he added."
The Independent , UK
"Bernie Sanders would have won the election if he had got Democratic nomination, says Trump pollster"
31 October 2017 18:05
5
In NYT world up is down and black is white. They say "Bernie can't win" because they know Bernie can win and it's Biden, Liz, Amy, and Pete who can't, but that truth, which they very well know, has to be denied at all costs.
9
Uh huh: banning fracking and aggressive action on climate change are part of a “Marxist pipe dream.” We’ve been hearing for years about how Bernie is a unelectable commie (courtesy of the people who brought you Hillary 2016). Let the people decide. You may not agree with all of Bernie’s positions, but at least you can trust he HAS morally responsible positions and is committed to fighting for them. That is electability, in the Age of Trump.
8
Conventional wisdom says Bernie can’t win ... too radical ... but then there is no Candidate more radical than Trump ... his views on race (Mexicans are rapists and thieves) , religion (we need to ban the Muslims) and Military Service (I like people who were not captured) make him far more radical than Bernie .... also 90% plus of Americans would disapprove of Trump’s views on those issues ... yet he still won ...
Trump was inspiring to many (aside from racists and members of serial liar club unclear why) and he got a substantial minority to vote for him .. so is it that far fetched to think Bernie could win ?
3
You would have made substantially the same arguments 4 years ago about you know who.
4
So what is the solution? Hillary was a moderate and she lost. Who is going to win? Joe Biden who can’t finish a coherent thought and whose campaign is as tired as a field horse? Klobuchar who can’t even get in the top 5 of the primary? Or Buttigieg, who has zero experience and comes off as Teflon coated jello? If Bernie can’t win than no one can. We will have another 4 years regardless. BTW stop the Soviet Union garbage...what Bernie is proposing is Denmark, not the USSR.
14
We need Joe Biden.
People said Donald Trump couldn’t win either.
3
"Class loathing feels so good"
Wow, such condescension. People are literally fighting for their lives against a terrible health care system, corrupt financial services systems, exploitative housing market, etc., but this highly paid columnist sees it all as a lark.
14
I agree with the writer. Bernie's ideas are too far left for me, a centrist. I have private insurance, and I like it. I agree that community college should be free for those who meet certain criteria. However, we are one trillion dollars in debt, thanks to this idiot in the White House, and we cannot afford a bigger national debt either with Bernie or Warren. The Mayor has little experience, although he is heed over heels better than what we have now. One day soon, he can be governor or senator. I am voting for Biden because he has experience, knowledge, common sense, and we need someone with those attributes to fix the damage that has been done. I will say one last thing, I will vote, volunteer, and donate to whomever is the candidate for the Democratic Party. I like Yang, when we win, he needs a cabinet post involving improving our technology, he would be great.
8
Sanders 'socialism' is Canada.
6
Our hearts overcome doubt...vote Bernie.
7
I have trouble taking anything you say in the op ed piece seriously, your statements are so flawed as to be laughable were it not for the obvious intent to attack Sanders and support who BTW Biden, unless your beloved Hillary throws her hat in the ring. Particularly absurd is your comment about FDR, hands down our greatest President, half of America would be on the street were it not for Social Security and Medicare: FDR BTW was for a form of “ socialized “ medicine. Comparing Obama to FDR as someone who shook things up, please I loved Obama, worked door to door on his campaign , but he was thoroughly disappointing as a President, eloquent, urbane, gracious, yes and in stark contrast to the animal house now in charge, but he did little to nothing to shake things up, he could have been an FDR had he forced a WPA type program through, he instead bailed out Wall Street. You and other “ experts” keep referring to socialism as it were the coronavirus, do you realize the best nations in the world with the happiest citizens are gasp, socialist, equally idiotic is the premise that single payer would be more expensive than our current for profit to make insurance honchos billionaires and put Wall Street in charge of our healthcare, you do know that the rest of the developed world has single payer in some form at half the price don’t you: yes lots of paper pushers would lose their jobs but they could become nurses, we need them . Sorry Terry your entire column is spurious at best.
12
You have to give the NYT credit for chutzpah.
The NYT got everything about the 2016 election wrong.
A psychologically healthy individual, upon failing so spectacularly, would engage in some serious introspection to understand how to move forward responsibly in the future.
There’s no evidence that the NYT has learned anything at all from 2016, and their certitude is as rock solid as it was 4 years ago.
The only good news here is that the NYT has been so shameless in their approach that they have seriously damaged their credibility.
People are starting to understand that the plutocrats own the media, and the true purpose of the media is propaganda.
A lot of us see Sanders as our last chance for a peaceful revolution, and are concerned about increasing unrest in the event that real structural doesn’t happen.
The NYT, with its aggressive advocacy for the invasion of Iraq, is the cornerstone of the neoliberal establishment, and as such, the NYT has been instrumental in the slow disintegration of our nation.
Maybe that’s why the mainstream media blathered on endlessly about racist, sexist and ignorant voters.
The mandarins in ivy towers couldn’t possibly have gotten anything wrong, since they’re the smartest people on the planet, therefore, the voters are stupid.
7
This column is embarrassing. The fact that every establishment pundit has published the same recycled article should be encouraging to Sanders supporters; that he is so irksome to the corporate elite (who are terrible at prognosticating) is a welcome development
13
Columnist: “I don’t think the American people are ready for socialism.”
Sanders supporters: “How dare you sell them short, of course their minds are receptive to revolution!”
Sanders: “I don’t think the American people are ready for a woman candidate.”
Sanders supporters: “Yeah, what can you do, people are set in their ways.”
7
"...American capitalism is working; it needs Teddy Roosevelt-style trustbusting and restructuring...
Spot on, Tim...
Who would you suggest, to lead this sorely needed and overdue charge...
2
The NYT is last place to fairly critique Bernie Sanders. YES - he CAN win!
6
This is embarrassing. Honestly I’m sick to death of opinion pieces by the leisure class telling me about how myopic I’m being when their way utterly dismantles the lives of the working class on the regular. It’s disgusting and shameful. I’m happy for you, that your charmed life is such that you don’t feel a Sanders presidency is your only shot at having any kind of quality of life before dying at work from preventable lifestyle diseases, but get out of the conversation if you have nothing of value to contribute.
9
I read this after listening to the latest episode of The Daily. The language in this piece (“Stillborn”, “beyond the fringe” the actual headline) is quite heavily steered toward a good hearty Bernie bashing, but I suppose it is an opinion piece and Mr. Egan can certainly express his. Surprised there wasn’t a Sandinista mention.
4
"Democrats lose with fire-and-brimstone fundamentalists."
Bingo.
Can too
5
If the GOP could turn war hero John Kerry into a coward versus draft dodger W, imagine what they'll do to Bernie.
6
Is Bernie making you nervous?
9
Bloomberg people, C'mon already.
5
Right Tim, and most Americans love our current President.
More Propaganda.
4
The upper class telling the lower class that class wars are "ultimately self-defeating"... The New York Times is a complete parody of itself.
8
Egan has clearly bit the foggiest idea what Marxism is. I do, and Sanders is not a Marxist (at least his campaign and political persona isn’t). Also “frothing at the mouth” - I see that the centrists really are in a panic. Pathetic.
8
Remember, “Donald Trump can’t win”?
7
Class loathing doesn't just pertain to the rich. There is plenty of class loathing for the folks Hillary Clinton called deplorables.
6
Anyone remember Egan's Hillary Clinton Can't Win?
5
By “Bernie can’t win” you mean “I don’t want Bernie to win.” Same goes for all these empty anti-Bernie columns. So desperate to ignore reality
9
This coming from a newspaper that predicted Hillary Clinton 88/12 would win the day of the election.
8
Right. Pinocchio couldn't win either. Let's put Bernie up against The Lying Machine and let's see who wins. Ir trump wins - fairly - (big if) we are truly doomed. He'll figure out how to get around term limits and get to be what his heroes are - dictators for life
5
Aren't you the guy that told us Trump couldn't win in 2016?
I thought so!
9
Really - a candidate from 100 years ago is your best analogy?
6
Go Warren!
3
"A weird column about a rape fantasy from 1972 is not going to sink Bernie when Trump has debased all public discourse."
I wasn't aware of this until the NYT used it's massive platform to make me aware of it.
Check out all the neoliberal journalists selectively placing opposition research against Bernie Sanders into their articles 72 hours prior to the first nominating content.
Coincidence? No, these journalists are establishment lobbyists.
7
This is exactly what was said about Trump.
5
The same stale arguments were made in 2016 about how Bernie couldn't win so we must pick Hillary Clinton. That worked out great for us, didn't it? Now you're here trying to spew the same playbook. Stop it.
8
Egan, you are wrong - and wrong in a big way. In the U.S., class warfare has been waged by the wealthy elite against the poor and middle class for decades. What do you think the Koch brothers having been doing for years - or Sheldon Adelson - or Bernard Marcus? Your comments reveal your ignorance of Bernie's movement. We seek justice, not vilification. We seek opportunity, not oppression. We seek true democracy, not plutocracy. The Dem moderates - like yourself - have failed to correct America's structural defects. Bernie will lose because of the actions of Dems like you.
8
So in essence you are saying: Americans will prefer a corrupt old man to a grumpy old man because the latter wears red-colored glasses while the former simply looks in the mirror.
4
I read today that the NYT has dedicated over 3K words this week to deriding Bernie Sanders and his supporters - and that's just the Times. The long knives are out. And the monotonous socialist meme is just endless. Tim, it's not about class loathing. It's about the decades-long economic destabilization of the middle class in America. And its lethal. This piece is so angry - OK we get it, you hate the guy. You sound like someone's cynical old, uncle groaning on about hippies and marijuana madness. The reality is whoever runs against trump will be vilified and demonized - but I see you have already given him a head start. No matter WHO runs we need to unify and get this Napoleon wannabe out of office - if we even have an election.
9
It's a shame the NYTimes allows someone to write an opinion about the positions of a candidate, when they don't understand them, and worse when they misrepresent them.
10
Wow! Food for thought...except for the chance of our outstanding demagogue and liar in-chief from re-assaulting the presidency this coming November...if passion-filled Sander's revolutionary moves fail (and become reactionary as a result), a fatal mistake we cannot afford to make. Do you suppose, for lack of another candidate you might recommend, that Ms Klobuchar might be the ideal, given the ruinous Electoral College results in the Mid- West in 2016? If this is a real democracy, where the majority's vote ought to dictate who the next 'chief executive will be, then we have to work knocking doors, to support somebody knowledgeable, dedicated to serve the public and with the honesty and decency to prove it. Basically, someone who represents the antithesis of the current vulgar bully in the White House, a huge mistake we made just three years ago, just because this charlatan promised heaven on earth...and given us only mischief... in the midst of pompous self-congratulations.
1
Tearing down a Presidential challenger does what, exactly?
This opinion piece is like the annoying whiner at work, who finds fault wherever he goes. This negativity does nothing, changes nothing. I challenge Mr. Egan to cheer up and find a candidate or idea which he can promote. I will be most curious to see if Mr. Egan can promote rather than fingerpoint.
I found the last paragraph particularly offensive, as it addresses his readers as ignorant "kids". Not all of us are uneducated idiots, sir.
7
You're in for a big surprise.
8
Made it to “Bernie Bro”.
5
This is the same paper that said Hillary was sure to win right up until after the polls closed election night 2016.
So pardon me while I laugh heartily.
8
Bernie Sanders can't win? Bernie Sanders must win.
6
You know, I don’t have a whole lot of patience with white men who frame their personal opinion as the absolute truth.
7
No "Safe" Democrat has won since the Civil War. Only strong and progressive Democrats win. Look at those winners:
Cleveland -- an anti-corruption reformer
Wilson--Progressive
FDR-- Need I say ANYTHING? "New Deal"
Truman -- Strong, desegregated the military
JFK -- as charismatic as FDR "New Frontier"
LBJ -- Strong, Dynamic, Progressive "Great Society" CRA, VRA,
Carter -- New South Liberal Democrat out of Left Field.
Clinton-- Same as Carter, only far more charismatic
Obama -- First African American. Community organizer
None were safe. Most of the rest,the ones who lost? "Safe"!
Hillary Clinton
John Kerry
Al Gore
Michael Dukakis
Walter Mondale
(OK, McGovern not so safe--48 years ago)
Humphrey
Etc.
So whenever someone says a candidate is too far left and the ONLY one they can point to who lost is McGovern, I call "Nonsense!"
10
Obama "shook up the system"? That's what we hoped he would do, that's what he told us he would do, that's what he had us believe he would do. But in the end, other than having darker skin, he did not shake up the system. He became part of it.
America elected a black man, then it elected a clown. Now it will elect a socialist--I hope.
8
Actually, Bernie Sander can indeed win! This fact is what is scaring the plutocrats and neo-liberals.
9
Sir (or sub-editor): class loathing clearly works for Trump.
Is it really what works for Sanders? Are they both “populists”? There are lots of great books out there that say no (see Cass Mudde or Jan Werner-Müller, who’s even been in the op-ed of the NYT!) . The constant fallacy on these pages is that Sanders and Trump are somehow two sides of the same coin. It’s lazy thinking.
4
This was a particularly poor article to publish on the day our democracy died.
Yeah. We do need a revolution.
Today made that clear.
12
Nope. If a corrupt, racist, phoney nobody like Trump can get elected (everyone said it couldn’t happen..google it), than Bernie has a real shot.
6
2016 - Trump can't win....
5
And Hillary Clinton can?
4
An analysis of the current Democratic Party concluding with a proof point from 120 years ago can in no way be taken seriously. Give me a break, NYT. Don't twist and torture facts to fit your argument.
8
Yes...
Bernie SANDERS President of the United States of America....
So there Mr. Egan...!!!
5
Vox disagrees :
https://www.vox.com/2020/1/31/21113780/bernie-sanders-socialism-electability-primaries
4
Well said. Mainstream voters will run from Bernie's rants, especially when the GOP's smear machine gets to work. While I support many of his ideas, he is a terrible candidate. He would best support his case by throwing his votes and campaign chest to Elizabeth Warren.
3
Bernie will reelect Trump again.....
2
You seem to have it backwards. Bernie can definitely win and beat Trump. Bernie would be the best president of my lifetime.
6
Spot-ON column.
Wake up, people. Get out of your Bernie bubble.
4
The Bernie door knockers will be asking a simple question: "How's capitalism working out for you?"
5
Mr. Egan - I just think you're very brave for writing this column.
Also, I think you're right on.
PS - I'm 74 and I know I'm not as sharp as I used to be. And the idea you can just rely on younger aides is foolish.
5
Under the tyranny of myopics, 20/20 vision is extremist.
1
Ummm last I checked the current year was 2020 not 1896.
William Jennings Bryan? Really?
The Democrats keep getting owned by the GOP. People are tired of these gradualists who think more about their own skins and political calculations. This strategy has failed it’s over.
Bernie is a fighter. We want a fighter, somebody who will apply pressure. Somebody who won’t take the dark money, the legalized bribery, and the future corporate board appointments.
The system is corrupt. Nancy Pelosi can’t author real drug prices negotiations in her bill, because most of the Democrats are owned by big Pharma.
The Democrats gave the lunatic in the White House everything he wanted in trade and in the very bloated military budget. They all rolled over for it without a fight last month.
Get money out of politics and forget your overdue term paper on William Jennings Bryan. Meaningless historical anecdotes I thought was David Brooks department.
7
IMHO, Bernie Sanders is the only Democrat who CAN win.
5
Oh, so the “strange honeymoon” in the Soviet Union, for which Sanders never apologized, doesn’t matter, Mr. Egan ? When recently asked about the bread lines in the same worker’s paradise, he angrily replied that at least there was bread to be had. Well, I’m one of the people who stood in line for bread and everything else when Sanders was cavorting with the Soviets, and it matters to me. Just like in Trump’s case, it’s about character. The American right says it’s OK for Trump to be a narcissistic crook, as long as he delivers on judges and whatever else matters to them. Sanders is not a crook but a fanatic of lost Marxist causes, as even this article acknowledges. What this article does not acknowledge though is that he shouldn’t be the Democratic candidate, not just because he would loose to Trump, but because the Democrats should not accept a very flawed human being for this important role.
1
So, you are saying, I can't win. Well, I guess it is time to get a different passport.
4
This column smells like the fear of the elite.
7
This is false and misleading speculation without explicit disclosure of the author's prejudices.
6
This Bernie Sanders that some New York Times (you remember the papers that can't stand Bernie Sanders) white protestant yuppie says "can't win", is this the same Bernie Sanders that won 16 state primaries in the 2016 - including 15 central and midwestern states, and 16 state conventions - 9 from central and midwestern states even while Hillary and her flunky Debbie Wasser-Schutlz jiggered the Democratic party 2016 rules illegally and unfairly solely to try and stop Sanders? Do you mean that Bernie Sanders Timothy Egan?
Lee Atwater long time GOP election expert "The horse that's been around the track the most wins" - And guess who's the only Democratic candidate that's been around the track before? Hint - gathering thirteen million votes - 43% of all primary ballots
PS I believe this is the same columnist that said
Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez couldn't win her 2018 election and
that progressives wouldn't take any 2018 elections.
The New York Times is showing all the integrity of GOP Senators at a Trump's impeachment trial?
8
read most of the comments. this one rings loud and clear for me: "Mr. Egan ably captures the whipped-dog demeanor that the Democratic Party establishment has been displaying since circa 1980." and the word "collaborationist" comes to mind.
8
Wow, Egan, you seem like a smart enough guy generally, but this PNW resident is ashamed for you today.
I assume you've been to at least one of the other OECD countries that has a national healthcare system? It's not hard, it's every one but the United States, including Canada, less than 2 hours from Seattle.
Maybe talk to Professor Krugman before writing this tripe?
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/08/16/opinion/denmark-socialism-fox.html
8
Let's see. Mayor Pete: smooth, smart and clean cut; sadly, it's still hard to imagine a gay couple kissing at the inauguration ball; Joe: not a sharp tool any more, and maybe he could get slashed by a more energetic Trump (put aside your appreciation for his service and VP to Obama...that's for Dems, not others); Warren: she's great but, sadly, a woman can be caricatured as nagging and wrought; Klobuchar: swears by her own midwest appeal, but we don't know the real story but up against Trump she might look a bit tiny; Bloomberg: capable of taking the fight to Trump, but kind of gruff and bland himself.
So who do the Democrats put on the ticket who does not also have serious issues? None, really. It's basically a pretty weak field, albeit they are all impressive in their own ways.
They will try to savage Bernie's "socialism," but all he really wants is accessible health care, an ability to afford college tuition, climate change responsiveness, forgiveness of the hideous burden of college loans, and taxes on the wealthy to fund a more middle-class-based approach. It seems that everyone is afraid of the demagogy, but it didn't bother Trump. Why?
5
Timothy Egan, You just lost me. Too bad from a fellow Cascadian. Bernie is our best option, and you and the NYT are just scared of the truth!!!
10
Trump is a dimwitted, vulgar slob. Significantly more than half of the country is appalled by him. I'm tired of reading how he's a lock to be reelected. I don't buy it.
8
This column reminds me of the moment in 2016 when Sanders announced his presidential run and the Times in its wisdom put the story on page 19. Eagan’s caricature of Bernie also puts me in mind of Hilary’s recent graceless attack on a man who did everything he could to support her disastrous campaign. I am disappointed in Eagan, from whom I would have expected better.
10
That is some incredible leap of logic - Williams Jennings Bryan lost 115 years ago, so Sanders can't win now. Makes sense to me.
6
I'm not a Bernie fan, but at least he wouldn't defend and even praise neo-Nazi white supremacists, like Donald Trump has done repeatedly.
6
The fear that Bernie Sanders will lose isn't the real reason neoliberals like Timothy Egan need to write scorching hate pieces about him.
The real reason is the fear he will win.
7
I especially like Adam Schiff because I have never seen a lawyer speak more frankly about the sordid state of litigation in the US.
5
FDR would beg to differ.
5
Mr. Egan is only too right I'm afraid, but only because the obstacle are Americans ourselves, not that Bernie has terrible ideas. Americans are not stupid, we know the system we're trapped in (capitalism) is destroying communities, the planet, the cause of rampant inequality etc but we're not willing to do anything about it, despite our nation's birth from revolution. It's cynical perhaps but I don't have any faith that Americans have that level of sacrifice in them whatsoever. No matter how we watch California burn or the babies behind bars, Americans treasure THY SELF above all else. Sorry to all the Greta's and Bernie's out there but saving the world from mankind is a pipe dream.
1
mr egan mentions the horror of socialism without telling us the word means--especially to americans.
is it countries like venezuela, cuba, china?
or existentials threats to the usa such as australia, france, germany, canada, new zealand, sweden.
all in the paragraph above might be failed states but they have longer life expectancies, lower infant mortality rates, health coverage for the masses at a much lower per capita cost and other terrible things......
5
Mr. Egan,
Please stop it with the circular firing squad.
7
The headline says it all. Sadly I can't identify a Democrat who can win.
1
Trump won be pretending to support people over corporations, something Clinton -- after decades of corporate pandering -- couldn't even pretend to do. Clearly, Trump lied.
Sanders, or any other Dem not named Biden, will wipe the floor with him.
7
The Soviet Union a 'totalitarian hell' in 1988? Even under Brezhnev, the USSR wasn't truly totalitarian as it had been under Stalin, and by 1988 glasnost' was well underway.
3
The first part of this article put me off entirely. "Class loathing feels so good" - Mr. Egan, it might just seem like "feelings" to you and an academic argument to be punted around in the pages of the NY Times but for millions of Americans, this isn't about emotions but about being able to survive and have a half-way reasonable standard of living where they aren't one pay check away from eviction, death, or starvation.
Mr. Egan, have you ever been poor? When I read this and similar columns in the times, it makes me think the writers are out of touch because they don't really know what it is like to be poor.
Most Americans have little problems with the wealthy -- they don't dislike them merely because of their $$$ - it's the inequality and unfairness that gets to people. Sure the wealthy may pay more taxes absolutely but %-wise -- when all is added together -- the poor pay more.
11
@stu freeman
Folks always forget that the machine that delivered the popular vote for Hillary was a national network of hardworking Democratic Party activists in every state, every county, every city, every zip code. They know where the votes are and they get them to turnout on election day. Hard to believe Democratic rank & file at the street level will be highly motivated by an old white guy who disdains the Democratic Party but is happy to hijack it for his personal ambition.
No track record of working with his colleagues in either the House or the Senate, or even managing a national campaign with a cabal of rigid ideologues who treat women badly and are full of themselves. They see Bernie as their free ride to act out their adolescent daddy issues, which is how Sanders treats the Democratic Party.
Anyone who thinks there is a solid anyone-but-Trump vote underestimates how fickle and easily confused too many Americans are with a Hobson's choice between the guy who's rich and tough-acting (decisive some think) and an angry old guy who can't explain how he'll pay for his pipe dreams or enact any of his proposals without any legislative savvy. We saw with Obama the limits of Executive Orders as a policy tool.
Even Senate colleagues in his at-arms-length caucus see him as a political cipher.
Americans prefer the devil they know over the self-righteous prophet of vengeance and retribution.
Sanders has two endorsements Biden and Warren don't: Trump and Putin.
3
Who exactly do these neoliberal pundits, speaking on behalf of the established order, speaking with the certainty that borders on sanctimony, expecting the faithful to treat their pronouncements as prophecy, think they are?
It would be nice to see this pundit entertain this thought, if only once:
Trump is the symptom. Neoliberalism is the disease. We need an alternative to the disease, not a return to its normal expression.
6
This article is a clear sign that Bernie is going to win.
7
Assail me for age discrimination but the physical and mental demands of the presidency hurt Sanders' odds of beating Trump, no youngster himself, but Trump has shown no evidence of aging because he doesn't take the office seriously. He awakens late every day, goes on numerous golf vacations, and essentially treats the office no differently than when he reigned over his real estate business. Sanders would take the office seriously, and judging from how much younger presidents Obama and Bush aged rapidly, asking a man nearing 80 to do the job is very dicey.
2
At any other time I would wholeheartedly support Bernie. He is a saint. Universal health care is a given, every normal nation has it. But because of Trump, things are different. We need to get this unhinged hooligan out. He has demagogued his way into controlling 50 Senators who are zombies for him. Scary is to slight a word. I keep thinking of Hilter and how he started. We need a white middle of the road man who is a Republican like Bloomberg. Southerners will like him. America is so screwed up with their archaic political system that a few southern states elect our President. Sick but true.
2
I read through your article. I am still voting for Sanders.
Every few things you said I totally disagreed with. I 110% agree with taxing the rich. The main reason I don't personally attack rich people's estates is that it is illegal. It is the job of the government to keep the rich in check via taxes and regulation. The government shouldn't be so thoroughly in bed with their wealthy donors that I have to play pitchfork vigilante. Maybe once we stop electing fiscally conservative "centrist" Democrats, the government will finally do its job.
I do not have confidence in the economy. We have an economy where the upper middle class are workaholics, college graduates are underemployed, and the working class can't find work and are addicted to opioids. Corporations are disloyal and exploitive of their employees and care more about their profits than their costumers. Big Tech is getting rich off of making everyone cell phone addicts. I don't care if the economy is growing, it still is awful.
I do not like my current insurance. It is tied to my employment and I don't have insurance when I am in between jobs. I want Medicare for All.
I don't care about defeating Trump. I care about winning the soul of the Democratic Party. I want to defeat the neoliberal "centrist" Democrats. I'm voting for Bernie because I actually agree with him. If you nominate someone like Mayor Pete or Klobuchar, I will vote to reelect Trump.
5
I am bruised by this op ed. I am wounded to see pundits and DNC power elite ganging up to stop Bernie.
Let him run without the negative op eds. Let him win primaries. Let the country see what happens. Stop trying to stop Bernie and, what the heck, trust democracy. Let's see who the people want and not who the pundits and oligarchs want.
After the DNC moves this week and now they are bending over to get Bloomberg in the next debate, I can no longer commit to voting for the eventual nominee. I am going down voting for Bernie. If he isn't the Dem nominee, I guess I won't be able to vote in this year's presidential race.
Bernie can't win with arrogant punits like Mr. Egan trying to influence the primaries. Let people vote and stop rigging the game.
4
Even after several years, I remain dumbfounded at the Times' repeated attempts to bring down candidates who threaten real change through carefully selected coverage and hyperbolic op-ed pieces (which now share equal space with actual news on online platforms).
I'm a huge fan of Egan's books, but this editorial is deceptive rhetoric at its most egregious. We who favor economic reform don't hate the rich (at least many of us don't); we hate the system which has become so monstrously unfair as to become a moral and ethical travesty that makes a mockery of democracy. Where in Sanders' platform is the cruelty toward the rich that you would expect as a consequence of hatred? We only want to make the rich ordinarily rich. Fabulously rich, even. But no longer obscenely rich.
By the way, the "totalitarian hell of the Soviet Union in 1988" was three years into Mikhail Gorbachev's perestroika, and arguably much freer than the Russia of today.
5
Forget Bernie. Since you can predict the future, what's the market going to do next week??
3
And if Bernie doesn't win, if progressive ideas that meet the needs of normal people are not put in place, at some point there WILL be people with pitchforks (and guns) tearing at the estate walls. Your article reeks of the kind of attitude that gave us Trump: centrist, outdated, and useless "policy" ideas.
6
Problem with Bernie Sanders is Trump being Trump will make gullible folks believe Bernie's recent heart attack makes him a risk, even though overweight Trump is a walking heart attack waiting to happen. Trump has a way of convincing insecure, uninformed folks he is a demigod who actually gives a damn.
And then there is the concern that the needed votes in places like Michigan, Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania which gave Trump the win will have Trump warning evangelical, blue colour voters that Bernie is a god hating socialist who wants to take their money, guns and freedoms.
Alan Dershowitz told the Senators that Trump believes what he wants for himself is best for America. Just like Kim Jong-un is a North Korean, Xi Jinping of China and Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin of Russian and different benevolent dictators.
2
Having read Mr Egan's column I have to say he's a perfect fit for the New York Times. I think it was Eugene McCarthy that once said that "A liberal Republican was someone who counted the wounded and the dead after the battle and then shed a tear" That seems to perfectly describe the contemporary moderate liberal Democrat. Let us all shed a tear and feel good about ourselves but do nothing to solve the problem. Give them hell Bernie.
5
We Bernie supporters want a Revolution, Like those in the USSR, in Cuba, Cambodia, East Germany, the French Revolution. We will bring the Revolution to America in November. You will all soon feel the Bern!
4
The common voter does not care about issues or read Op-Eds. They want someone who makes them feel good. Trump tapped into that with his feels true but isn't racist grandpa act. He took many unpopular positions, had no plans that made sense and won by complaining about how everyone was taking advantage of us and talking about how crappy our airports are. Sanders can win for the same reason. He makes people feel like good and can win working class trump voters over (and is the only one who can). The thoughtful, educated people who might take issues with some of his ill conceived policies will vote for anyone but trump anyway so he should spend 0 time worrying about anyone who might read this comment.
The best thing about a Sanders win, if he’s the nominee, is that Trump would have gotten himself impeached and lost an election by going after the wrong guy.
4
Requiring the wealthy, super-wealthy and corporate interests to contribute back in the form of taxes for the value they extract from society is neither punitive nor an expression of hatred.
The real revulsion in this country is toward the poor and lower middle class. So called 'centrist' policy compromises seldom pass and do little for average Americans. This fuels support for the demagoguery of the increasingly extreme right.
4
Had Hillary chosen Bernie as the VP, she would have won despite all that happened. These two forces still exist today, in fact Bernie's political point of views have gained more traction, while those of Hillary diminished. The Hillary wing of the party is Biden's and without merging these two forces, there is a good chance Trump will win again.
However we have a candidate today who can unite both of their politics and she Elizabeth. It is also quite obvious that an older white woman of Trump's generation is his kryptonite aka Nancy. We are in the same position today as we were before FDR, where the rigged GOP plutocracy has America resemble a failed third world country. Warren's diagnostic of our political problems and her solutions are FDR 2.0. American made the right choice then and hopefully we can do it again.
I just plain don't like him. Or his hostile bros. I'm afraid he can't beat Trump, and I really don't want to vote for him. Hoping I don't have to.
4
The Death Star that may destroy progressive hopes in 2020 is sitting in plain sight. It is called the Green Party. In 2016 Trump won Michigan by 10,704 votes — Jill Stein, the Green Party nominee, took 51,463. In Wisconsin Trump’s margin was 27,117. Stein took 31,006. Who better than Bernie to usher Green Party voters into the Democratic column? Who better? And who better to stimulate larger turnout among voters under age 35? Anyone? If Bernie is the nominee, and picks as his VP a prominent minority, he might also approach the minority turnouts in the Obama years? Who better?
3
If Sanders is the Democratic nominee and he loses who will his supporters blame?
3
You don't like Bernie Sanders, you don't like the idea of change. You want to keep things pretty much the same as they always have been, a situation that brought us Trump. But you'll happily tell us why you think Bernie can't possibly win after telling us why Trump couldn't win.
Your center right politics have had their time and their time is over. And lest you think that I am some 20 something year old Bernie bro, I'm neither a bro nor a millennial. Plenty of us in our 40s and 50s and 60s are right behind Bernie.
The United States has problems that will not be solved by another middle of the road politics as usual approved by the New York times centrist Democrat. What does it tell you the deaths of despair are at an all-time high? What does it tell you that our life expectancy has gone down for 3 years in a row? That we pay more per capita than anywhere else for our health care but our results are worse? That the suicide rate in this country is at its highest since World War II?
What does it tell you that people who voted for Obama were so disillusioned and disenfranchised that they voted for Trump? it tells me that if they were offered a genuine populist, someone who wants to make life better for them, someone who actually believes in the things he has been saying for the past 50 years that those people would have voted for him.
If you can't join us, at least have the decency to take your thumb off the scale.
9
Very interesting--and very brave article! I do hope you have an alternate residence to live safely in; once the twitter mafia posts your address, et al, there is no telling...
What confounds me is how the die-hard Bernie-ites think that he can succeed, or how he would accomplish anything on the order of what he advocates if he did. It seems that they lack any interest in how things actually work; and that they have paid scant attention to how easily the Republicans have thwarted nearly all attempts from the opposition to prevent the dissolution of the middle class.
It isn't like he accomplished anything of note during his 30--plus years in the House and the Senate. Unless you count being able to live like a well-wrought Socialist, courtesy of public largess. And poisoning Hillary's reputation with his own followers, even when it was obvious that it was either her or Trump.
Then there is the irony of becoming a multi-millionaire, while excoriating those billionaires, with nothing for the public good having been achieved.
3
The notion in these pages in 2015 and 2016 was that Trump was capped at 30-40 percent and couldn't win once a) the Republican field was culled down to two or three, b) Sanders conceded to Clinton, c) Clinton opened her general election campaign, d) voting in the Midwest and Middle Atlantic were done. The fact is that despite many organizational disadvantages, Bernie performed well in quite a few states where Clinton lost narrowly, that he appeals to many working class voters who voted for Trump because they see the mainstream candidates signing up for the perpetuation of the hegemony of the Ivy League classes. Since then he has developed strong support among African Americans under 40, leading the field. In truth, Sanders is no radical. He is far more New Deal Democrat than Bolshevik. He is a consistent supporter of reasonable redistributive measures with a long, successful history in Western Europe. It's been over a hundred years since Teddy Roosevelt broke up the trusts and 88 years since FDR built the foundations of the modern United States. Our infrastructure is falling apart. Inequality has grown sharply since 1980. Our social contract is failing. Tens of millions lack health insurance. We need a difference maker in the White House. Bernie Sanders is that man. Every New York Times attack on him further confirms that the paper's supposed liberalism cloaks blanket opposition to any recalibration of the rules of a society tilted against the middle and working class.
4
I find it frightening that the online army of Bernie Bros have grown so comfortable substituting their own personal political desires for lucid analysis of the national political landscape.
They are so convinced of the righteousness of their cause that they literally cannot fathom how any right-thinking person could see things another way. Never mind that we've tried versions of the Bernie experiment in 1972 and 1984, to catastrophic results.
The assume that because all their friends in Brooklyn and Los Angeles and Portland are into Bernie, that he is a viable candidate in parts of the country that will actually decide the election. Never mind that, as David Frum observes, "the Sanders campaign is a bet that the 2020 race can be won by mobilizing the Americans least committed to the political process while alienating and even offending the Americans most committed to it."
Not only will Bernie lose if nominated — Democrats will almost certainly lose the Senate and the House, as well as many state houses, allowing Republicans to radically disenfranchise the electorate for a generation. Donald Trump will begin his second term with Congressional majorities and a judiciary stacked with toadies.
The stakes could not possibly higher. This is like gambling your house away at the racetrack.
7
@ Michael
They (Sanders supporters) are just like Sanders—elitist and condescending; the same way Trump supporters are just like Trump. Funny how that works.
2
I respect Bernie and was all gung-ho for him in 2016 but a lot has changed since, and other candidates also propose major changes. I'm mostly concerned about his ability to consider others' ideas and get cooperation to implement his own.
I'd sincerely like to hear why people committed to Bernie aren't willing to consider Warren. I think she'd be more likely to get cooperation, thus get more things done.
No attacks on me, please. I'm asking for honest, calm, well-reasoned responses if anyone even responds.
6
Sure, Bernie could very well lose when facing Trump, but does another bland, moderate candidate such as Hillary, or dare I say Biden, have a significantly better chance of defeating Trump? I don't necessarily see this viable, perfect alternative candidate that pundits claim would almost magically prevail and appeal to absolutely everyone.
3
Sanders vs. Trump 2020 would be a repeat of McGovern vs. Nixon 1972. If you don't remember the election, the always unpopular Nixon won 49 states and won by 18 million votes. McGovern's problem, of course, was he was "too liberal."
3
To the Bernie-and-no-one-elsers: Some of us Democrats really don't like Bernie as a candidate and don't want him to run. Bernie is not the one to defeat Trump. Not wanting Bernie doesn't mean that we are deserving of your dismissiveness. Maybe we should all be listening to each other and not get stuck in our own ruts. Trump is dangerous and he is quickly ruining our country. That's what we have to keep in mind at every moment. First thing is to nominate someone who can beat him. If you pick Bernie, you are in fact picking Trump.
7
I was a Bernie supporter in 2016, but this is exactly why I support Andrew Yang. He understands the current issues in the US but in a way that appeals to both sides. If we learned anything from 2016, we should know by now that an establishment candidate like Biden will not win. But neither will someone who is too far left and alienates many people who believe in the current system. I've been volunteering for Yang, and it's been amazing seeing how he resonates with both Democrats and Republicans and both poor and rich people.
6
"That’s the thing about class loathing: It feels good..."
Please forgive me for being so blunt, but it's also strictly a third-world level emotion. I say this as a former resident of multiple third-world countries. Much as I enjoyed them and their people, Senator Sanders reminds me more than a little of those countries' politics.
And yes, so does President Trump. The principal problem I have is that Sen. Sanders would be worse, if you can imagine that.
4
Part of the problem is how we define "Socialism" . Subsidies and tax breaks to fossil fuels, defense contractors, corporate farms, wall street, walmart, Trump himself are not socialist? But education, universal healthcare, housing, clean air and water are?
6
Excellent article- hope it opens the eyes of democrats supporting him. Like the con man, Bernie thrives on class warfare and division. It may sound great to win the primary since most people don’t vote. But, the message will be a failure during the general election. He forgets that Bill Clinton and Obama lost Congress and Senate because health care is a divisive issue. Medicare for all will be a great fodder for con man’s propaganda machine during the election. Bernie has also proposed many “free” things to lure voters despite the fact that none of them will occur because of the current legislative and judicial structure. Alas, his pipe dreams are luring some voters exactly same way as the con man’s manipulations work. Democrats have a choice- vote for Bernie if you want to see the basic foundation of our great nation completely destroyed by giving Trump another four years.
3
One has to understand the dynamics of the general election. The presidential election will be decided by 20% of the population of five of six purple states populated by middle class white not very progressive people who just want stability. These are not individuals who want dramatic change; they have health insurance from their employer maybe not the best but safe. People like Bernie and Warren frighten them. The thing I've never understood about Bernie is that as a long term member of the senate he knows full well that the cost of his agenda will require massive tax increases which is something that has no legislative possibly of being approved. His heart may be in the right place but his brain should know he's living a fantasy.
1
Taking employer provided health insurance away from workers will lose their votes in PA MICH WISC OH.
A Dem candidate must win these states.
HRC lost them.
Obama carried them.
Bernie would lose them in 2020 and the election.
He should stay in Senate.
5
Mr. Egan is essentially right about whether Sanders could beat Trump, and he is denounced by the Sanders supporters commenting here who believe that the majority of voters in a few key states -- Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Ohio, Michigan, Arizona, and North Carolina -- are willing to go along with the increased taxes and greater federal control over nearly everything that Sanders advocates.
To compare Sanders with FDR is nonsense. FDR was pragmatic and open to ideas from a wide variety of advisers and politicians. Sanders, in contrast claims that he knows the answer to everything in advance, and firmly believes that only he is right and everyone else is clearly wrong.
Sanders' core supporters adore him and don't understand that they consist of less than 15% of the voters nationally, and probably even fewer in the key states.
4
"87 percent who have a positive view of free enterprise" Those 87% believe in a fantasy. That is why they are willing to ignore Trump's peccadilloes and grand theft while purporting high moral dudgeon. Our economic confidence is built on deficits for which the bottom 90% will pay. Please, can we have a leader who will deliver us from these endless gouging schemes?
In 2016, each time a poll had Sanders versus Trump, Sanders won.
7
Sanders is an appealing character with a clear message, but his supporters are romanticizing him as a tough old bird who can take anything thrown at him. it is not possible for someone Bernie's age to handle the demands of the Presidency. He is at serious risk for a second heart attack. No amount of grit, exercise or longevity-prone genetics can protect him from the diminished capabilities all men have at his age. Senators have functioned well enough into their 90s, and that's where he should stay....or appoint him to the Supreme Court!
1
In today's issue, two obviously Democratic opinion columnists, Mr. Krugman and Ms. Collins said basically the same thing which was not to worry because if Bernie is elected because Congress will rein him in and his policies will never see the light of day. No, seriously!
Here's Gail Collins, in a reply to one of her anti-Sanders readers:
. . . No president gets to do everything he wants, and if Sanders is president Congress will water down his economic proposals with their usual diligence. . .
Here's Paul Krugman:
"If you’re a centrist worried about the gigantic spending increases Sanders has proposed, calm down, because they won’t happen."
They won't happen? Look, I'm not a centrist but I don't remember any such disclaimers ever being written about JFK's candidacy, Obama's, Al Gore's or John Kerry's, especially by such important shapers of Democratic political opinion as these distinguished opinion columnists.
What ever happened to "May the best woman win" that I stayed up late for?
1
The U.S. is a country with a history of many iintractable injustices and we have had a handful of progressives rise in our history to fight for a better society. MLK and too many others have been killed in the prime of their strggles and their visions' left largely unfulfilled.
But in many ways things are worse now than ever. Capitalism is clearly more unforgiving is just not working for most of our population. The climate is facing almost certain disaster. Our economy will certainly face a major recession at any moment. And our democracy, under Trump and his minions, is tottering towards dictatorship if we don't change course and quickly.
We got Trump, partly because of his racism and demogoguery but because of the desperation of too many people angry and disastified with the status quo supported by both parties.
Given these realities, a status quo Democrat like Biden with no vision or solutions offers people little or no hope or reason to support him or even vote. Biden or someone like him will certainly lose. No one can guarantee that Bernie can win but we know what kind of candiate will lose.
The only way to fight against evil and darkness is with light and hope. I do not take this position out of mindless idealism but because I think it is the only realistic way forward.
Otherwise, all bets are off and we are going down.
6
Mr. Egan makes a critical point that many seem to be missing here - Bernie has never been consistently attacked by the Republican smear machine. I like Bernie and would campaign hard for him if nominated, but Egan is likely correct that the Fox Propaganda machine will tear him apart on Socialism, Medicare for Fall, & ICE. I think we have other candidates who do not have these liabilities.
5
@Frank Roseavelt, yes, as usual middle class and low income folks will, as usual, vote against their own self interests. And good for them. I have no sympathy for their existence, if they don’t have for themselves.
2
Bernie would be better off not using hot-button words such as "revolution" (upheavals, guillotines, chaos, rolling heads, vengeance, and death) or "socialism" (Bernie means European-style "democratic socialism." but Americans don't know what socialism is, except they have been told for generations it is "bad," and it means Soviet-style communism, or so the Republicans and Fox will say.
If Bernie didn't label what needs to be done as "revolution" to restore and give back America to the people, but he simply described in general terms what needs to be done, I think many Americans would agree. Focus on basics for all of society: infrastructure, quality affordable health care, lower drug prices, preschool education, climate change, preserving national parks.... How to pay for it? How many Americans would be against raising taxes and closing tax loopholes on the greedy rich?
Bernie's VP partner: Amy Klobuchar (youngish, smart, tough, experienced, sense of humor, Midwestern, and most of all down to earth and practical).
1
You call it class loathing, I call it class consciousness. It's the realization that the real struggle isn't between whites and minorities, Christians and Muslims, men and women...it's between the economic and financial elite who benefit from the status quo and the average citizen. It's the realization that the white minimum wage worker, or even the white middle class, has more in common with a Latina, a Muslim, a trans person...than they do with the billionaire class.
7
All the folks who keep saying that Sanders will lose against Trump should maybe take a look at the polls that consistently out him ahead by several points in the rust belt swing states.
5
"Bernie can't win" = "we'd rather see a moderate lose to Trump than risk real redistribution." Make no mistake about it: the author is more afraid of Bernie than Trump. But that doesn't mean Bernie can't win. In fact, he is doing the best of all the candidates in a head to head against Trump. And Trump himself is most concerned about Bernie. Why? Because the electorate are not neoliberal ideologues. They don't care about capitalism. They vote for authentic candidates who promise to smash the system.
10
Mr. Egan, this happens to be your personal opinion. It's along the same lines, and has the same quality of data behind it, as Hillary Clinton's "Nobody likes him."
A lot of random "average" people I run into and ask, say they are voting for Sanders.
Maybe you ought to convince the good midwesterners in Iowa that he is such a dangerous socialist. Apparently lots of Iowans like him.
One thing I can tell you: people have had it with the status quo Democrats that have been running the party since 2009, or rather, since 1993.
7
Dangerous Socialist or not, he really isn't likable and he's pretty much a one issue candidate. He just doesn't seem to be presidential material and look where that got us.
Mr Egan,
I have greatly admired your books, but am deeply disappointed by this article. You seem to have a strong grasp on the past, and I encourage you to relegate your future works to it, because your grasp on the present seems quite feeble indeed. While many well-to-do liberals after four years seem uninterested in understanding them, there are very valid reasons Mr. Trump was elected president. While it seems that you have not had to grapple with the struggles of living paycheck to paycheck, working multiple jobs and still struggling to pay bills, being unable to afford healthcare, etc., many of your fellow citizens have and they were so fed up with the moderate elites in control of the democratic party that they felt they were better off throwing their lot in with an unstable egomaniac. While He has utterly failed to drain the swamp and instead bowed to its rulers, if we again fail to endeavor to make this country one where the promises of life, liberty, and happiness are accessible to all, He will reign for four more years. Thus I urge you to find some obscure event in the far past and commit yourself to it so that it will keep your keyboard busy through November. Then we will finally be able to enjoy another work of yours that is thoughtful and intelligent.
6
I enjoy Mr. Egan's columns and more often than not find what he has to say informative and helpful. But, I am sorry to say that his view that Sander's can not win is overblown. Donald Trump will be difficult to defeat (his utterly loyal base, the advantage of incumbency, heads start in internet focused campaign) and until the Democrats choose their candidate it is destructive to eviscerate any of the contenders.
I would also like to ask Mr. Egan a question. Do you get any sense their is a growing feeling of Trump fatigue? All the tweets, the nastiness, the lies are getting old.
5
Bernie needs to give his "bros" and his votes to Elizabeth Warren. He will never win; she at least has a chance at VP spot. This is not Sweden. We can evolve toward gov't health care - if the next steps to improve the HCA work. We can't threaten to take away people's existing healthcare or they will vote against the Dems. While we might have a shot at free community college for all, no way can we pay for free university for all. Besides, his cranky, yelling old grampa act if very off-putting and unpresidential. While I'd vote for him over Trump, he's my last Dem choice; and no moderate or independent would ever vote for him. Nothing personal; just the obvious truth.
2
Atta boy. Confiscate all that billionaire money invested in your 401k's and pension plans. And watch half your health providers go out of business on Medicare4A rates, creating shortages. And be sure to ban the fossil fuels and deregulation driving the economy.
Second-order consequences and thinking past your nose is, and will always be, your failing, and is why you're gonna lose.
1
Mr. Egan, well said. Democrats need to remember that to win this critical election, we have to get a candidate through a firestorm of negative campaigning and false accusations that will stick no matter how wrong them are. Bernie may appeal to those seeking what seems like a quick change and a new direction, but he's so easily targeted as a socialist who will raise your taxes and take away your health care. All of the Democratic candidates will take us in a better direction than we're going in now, and what matters is winning. Bernie is too much of a gamble.
5
The sad fact is that Obama’s failure to deliver much if any shake-up of the system is a big part of why Trump won.
Obama ran into hope and change. He ran on Yes We Can. He ran as a fairly progressive candidate, and people loved it. I loved it.
When elected, though, he brought in the same Wall St. people who had caused the crash to fix it. Surprise surprise, they bailed out the banks and let the rest of us hang.
Obama got a huge reform of health care done. Nothing to sneeze at. But he refused to press for a public option, caved to the insurance and pharma industries, and as a result we’ve still got tens of millions uninsured—and those of us with insurance have seen our premiums, copays, and deductibles go through the roof.
Obama even came close to making the “Grand Bargain” to squeeze Social Security and Medicare.
Obama ramped up drone killings, assassinated a US citizen with one, persecuted whistleblowers, and invoked national security to shut down a dozen or more lawsuits over NSA spying.
He didn’t even fight when McConnell stole a SC seat.
Obama turned out to be a perfect Third Way Democrat, not a progressive. He left tremendous frustration in his wake.
Thus we got Trump, as a decent chunk of Obama voters rebelled and switched sides. And we got Sanders, a true and consistent progressive, whatever his flaws.
We definitely do NOT need another Obama.
13
Thanks for the insightful columns. Now if we could only get our fellow Iowa democrats to read ALL of this before Monday, we might head off impending doom. The statistic about American optimism about the current state of the economy is staggering to me, but upon reflection, it rings true. If your only chance at winning an election is to convince people that they are miserable when most clearly are not, you have a steep uphill climb.
Actually this writer like many others needs to retake Econ 101. Facebook is really not a monopoly, I don't use facebook nor do my adult children. But, we all use Comcast or Verizon for ISP or Cellular. The ISP is a clear monopoly in most areas of the country, the cellular business is shrinking, and the pricing almost identical. These are near necessities in 2020. Facebook is not. As for Sanders, this piece resembles the same flawed thinking of big media with regards to Trump in 16. Obama it should be pointed out was fortunate that Lehman melted down 6.5 weeks prior to the election, which all but assured his win.
2
The comments on this piece are depressing. One of the main points is expressed in this excerpt: "Sanders does not identify as as a socialist, but as a democratic socialist..."
Anyone who thinks a majority of voters in the US understand that distinction is very mistaken. That's true right now and will be more true when the GOP message avalanche gets going.
Having as a centerpiece of your platform a Medicare for All utter transformation of health care that 70% of voters do not want is very mistaken.
Sanders' positions on billionaires and inequality are great (as are Warren's), and they will resonate, but the 'socialist' branding would absolutely kill Sanders in swing states.
Let's check back when this is over. The candidate Sanders would win 4-5 states tops.
signed,
a (pragmatic) democratic socialist
7
@kgeographer Like your signature. Me too, and I also have wondered why Sanders doesn't just let up on insisting on a term that puts people off. Maybe he's too honest? Half-ironic.
In any case, though I think this particular insistence is perhaps one of the biggest flaws in his campaign, on the other hand, it seems the electorate--the always-dem electorate, at least--have broadened their knowledge base. If we could have a black president, if we could have a wacko dishonest president, maybe, this time around, just maybe we really could have Bernie.
Blue 2020
1
Sanders supporters are fond of asserting that the center-left Democratic candidates who lost recent elections - Gore, Kerry, Clinton- prove that the electorate rejects center-left and is ready for a 78-year-old Independent Democratic Socialist who's been in Congress for almost half his life. This view ignores the fact that two of these candidates won the popular vote and lost the electoral vote, and had been subjected to extensive smear campaigns orchestrated by Republicans and/or hostile foreign actors. The third split the popular vote and lost the election because of corrupt actions by Republicans in Florida and a last-minute Supreme Court intervention. None of these losses suggest that the correct takeaway is America is yearning for a Democratic Socialist president. It will not happen. I despair, honestly, watching Bernie Sanders surging in the primary polls. We may not survive four more years of this.
4
Mr. Egan's column is the quivering voice of the corporate elites who have now woken up to the reality that Bernie Sanders can, in fact, win, and they are terrified. Watch as the attacks against Sanders grow with the growth of his poll numbers. And accept, Mr. Egan, that "The Times They are a Changin'..."
15
Not a corporate elite. Not a fan of Bernie's. Not helpful to name call and generalize.
5
I agree with the author that Sanders can’t beat Trump. But, if Sanders has a chance, he would because:
1- Trump is a demagogue with a vociferous base that would still support him if he were to shoot someone on Fifth Avenue. The same can be said for Sanders.
2- The election would be a contest of populism from right to left and if the left turns out they will in higher numbers.
However, I agree with Mr. Egan. Americans don’t hate the rich. They hate elitism. True, the Trump family are the essence of snobbery but they are good at disguising it.
But as long as the one percent are the enemy the Sanders general election won’t work. This is because people want to be rich. They want to be billionaires. Why vote for a guy who makes all billionaires the bad guy? Trump is the bad guy. Not Michael Bloomberg. Not Bill Gates.
Plus Sanders is hopelessly elitist. According to Democratic lawmakers, no ideas are as good as his and everything has to be his way. He will never get those big ideas passed in the Senate because he has no friends, and even if he did where are 60 votes coming from?
I hope Sanders wins if he is the nominee. But I will be voting for Warren. I think she is a more pragmatic progressive than Sanders.
However if he is the Democratic nominee I will vote for him first thing in the morning. I don’t like him but he’s better than Trump.
3
Bernie Sanders can win. Elizabeth Warren can win. But most of all Trump can lose. And Republicans who voted "NO" to witnesses should be made to walk the plank.
16
Why did DJT obtain the presidency? He knew that Americans were sick of the establishment that has slowly destroyed the middle class why the wealthy elite(read campaign contributors)
reaped the benefits of sending factories overseas, increased worker productivity and tax cuts for the wealthy. How can one not see this as a class war?
12
@Mark Warren's core campaign is against wealthy oligarchs and corruption, too, and she has a far better chance of getting people to cooperate -- and to listening to ideas other than her own. Please consider her as someone who also stands for what you do.
I see it mostly as racism.
I would like to know what polling Sanders gets now with the people in swing states who voted for Obama but then voted for Trump this last time?
Does anyone have any legitimate polling statistics of those people?
4
This isn't about class it's about how the federal govt distributes our hard earned tax dollars plain and simple.
I for one would like to not see 59% of our tax dollars going to the military and all that it entails, supports and destroys across the globe. We can spare some of that for good use at home. I don't care if Bernie wins or not we simply need major institutional change across the board.
9
Another op-ed that tries to cite history but doesn't get it right. there was plenty of support for socialism, even syndicalism and anarchism in the late nineteenth century. But the plutocrats and others of their political persuasion beat it and its supporters into the dust, using the National Guard, hired goons and occasional murders to suppress it. The Socialists still won in the Upper Midwest and many of the Populist Party (very different from today's "populists") became Socialists, especially in Oklahoma and Minnesota. The IWW (Industrial Workers of the World) was strong for a while in the mining areas of the West. They too were suppressed, leaders were jailed and a few were executed.
The Great Depression was also a threat to the established order in the US, but as no less than Patrick Buchanan pointed out, FDR "saved capitalism." Time and inept attempts at history have buried the sit-down strikes, the farmers' revolts, and the like.
Cherry-picking facts from the past is easy; lawyers, journalists and all sorts of other people do it all the time. But it's not history.
What does this have to do with Sanders' campaign and the latest in the Times' pattern of denunciation and disparaging of Sanders? Nothing other than it is a pattern.
13
If I understand correctly, despite his years in Congress, Bernie Sanders does not have a strong record of sponsoring and getting legislation passed that would move his Democratic Socialist agenda forward.
This should be a concern as it is unlikely to change if he were elected.
6
Imagine Bernie wins the nomination. The country, the world, is in shock that a self-avowed socialist may be the next President of the United States. Fox News, Facebook, Twitter erupt in a firestorm of debates, more like massacres, about the pros and cons of democractic socialism. Most Americans, of course, have no idea what democratic socialism actually means or how it differs from a social democracy. Democrats are at a loss as how to best respond to the onslaught of attacks from the right. Should they embrace and defend socialism or should they try to argue that Sanders is not actually a democratic socialist?
So everyone eagerly tunes into the first debate between Trump and Sanders hoping that Sanders' arguments will shed light on this question. Sure enough, the first question from the moderator to Bernie Sanders is:
"Mr. Sanders, you describe yourself as a democratic socialist. You have also made reference to some of the Scandinavian countries as providing good role models for the US. Yet, none of these countries, nor any other Western European countries, have socialist governments. Rather, they are social democracies, democratic, free-market economies just like the US. Could you please explain the differences between the social democrat policies of Western European countries and your own democratic socialist policy agenda?
End of debate.
2
@Robert
End of debate, in which direction?
1
I understand people's reservations about Sanders. Now here's a short list of relatively recent Dem. nominees:
Dukakis, Kerry, Gore, Mrs. Clinton. What's the most important thing these people have in common?
I'm also reminded of a fellow named Biden, who was widely rejected the first two times he ran.
6
I can’t help but notice that none of the comments lamenting Mr. Egan’s criticisms of Senator Sanders fail to acknowledge that he is as much of a career politician as nearly all of the Democratic candidates.
The biggest difference, as far as I can tell, is that it’s mostly the supporters of Bernie Sanders that are ready to cannibalize the Democratic Party, over some purportedly ‘progressive’ idealistic nonsense, that is as likely to be achieved as Mexico is to pay for Donald Trump’s wall.
It’s not unreasonable to believe that money plays an outsize role in political outcomes. It is unreasonable to believe that refusing to accept donations from moneyed interests will somehow increase the likelihood of a candidate succeeding.
1
@ubique
Thanks for reaching for the stars. This country never would have become as great as it is without that kind of "can't-do" spirit.
8
I keep going back and forth on this. The problem is Democrats haven't found an Obama - a candidate who can both appeal to the center and get people excited to come out to the polls. Biden and Klobuchar align closest to where I stand politically, but neither seem to be able to motivate. Warren and Sanders get the endearment of crowds, but have put out positions that scare a sizable section of Democrats, myself included. Buttigieg's comes the closest, but his record is thin and his momentum seems to be fading. In the end Trump is such an odious man that a lot of moderates like myself will come out to vote no matter who the nominee is. We need a candidate that gets people to the polls, and if that be Bernie, Yang, or Sanders, so be it. I might not agree with many of their ideas, but so what? We cannot take another four years.
7
Obama was a weak president. He achieved next to nothing despite having two full years when the Democrats had both houses. He couldn’t even convince that snake called Joe Lieberman, to vote for a public option in the ACA.
Get over it, the one percent loved Obama and Bill Clinton and they hate Bernie. You know why?
Guess!
2
That Timothy Egan knows that Bernie Sanders claims to be a democratic socialist does not enable Egan to know that Sanders could not defeat Trump.
First, the US never had a candidate who describes herself as a democratic socialist be the nominee of a major political party.
Second, recent polls are close on the issue of whether the majority of people in the US would vote for a qualified socialist or democratic socialist for public office, including president. For instance, in a November 2019, Hill-HarrisX poll, 48% of respondents said that they would vote for a democratic socialist for public office, while 52% said that they would not. Moreover, in an April 2019 Gallup poll, 47% of respondents said that they would vote for a generally well-qualified person for president who happened to be a socialist, while 51% said that they would not. So, it’s not as if there were multiple excellent polls conducted within the last couple years in which 90% of US respondents said that they would not vote for a socialist or democratic socialist for public office, including president.
Third, when people hear what Sanders means by "democratic socialism" and what policies he favors, most realize that they agree with many, most or all of his key policy ideas. What Sanders favors is basically Scandinavian social democracy. For instance, he does not think that the government should prohibit private ownership of the means of production in all circumstances.
8
@Michael David You are right, Sanders basically is advocating social democracy ala Scandinavia. But Republicans are going to come after him for his "democratic socialism" label.
Sanders could, of course, pivot and say, "OK, fine, when I said I am a 'democratic socialist' I didn't really mean it. What I meant is that I am a social democrat."
But does anyone really think that Sanders is going to disavow democratic socialism? That he is going to admit that, basically, he went overboard and made a stupid mistake?
And if Sanders stuck to his guns, as most likely he would, well, then he'd be an easy target for Republicans. They would scream from the hilltops that there is not a single democratic socialist country in the world that has a well-functioning economy, that Sanders wants to turn the US into another Cuba or Venezuela, and so.
Anyone who would call Sen. Sanders a "Marxist" isn't worth reading. Sanders is no Marxist. He's no Communist, large or small "c" variety, and he's no socialist either. Eugene Debs, the fiery leader of the Socialst Party in its heyday in the 1920s wouldn't recognize Sanders as a a supporter. No Sanders is really more of a late model version of Franklin D Roosevelt, a man who came into the White House job as the bankers' friend, survived a planned coup by his Wall Street friends with the help of Marine war hero Gen. Smedley Butler, demanded their support on pain of facing treason charges, and began instituting socialist ideas like Social Security, unemployment insurance and laws legalizing unions to quiet the rising worker unrest. As the war was ending Roosevelt moved further left, seeing the trend in soon-to-be Post-war Europe, and at the start of his record-breaking fourth term proposed an Economic Bill of Rights that would guarantee everyone a well-remunerated job, government run health care, and a home. It was a bold plan, quickly forgotten by Cold Warrior Truman. Sanders wants to pick up where FDR would have gone had he not suffered a fatal stroke. When he wins the Democratic presidential nomination this July, they Americans will cheer his plans, as well as his vow to end legal corporate bribing of politicians. I predict this election will be one of the most impassioned and exciting in memory, and the honest, humanist Sanders will crush the corrupt narcissist Trump.
9
@Dave Lindorff Sanders proposes much more taxes than paid by Europeans:
https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-tax-increases-to-come-11580075160?mod=searchresults&page=1&pos=13
His policies require 69% marginal tax rate on incomes above 200K. Add state and local taxes, and here in CA it pushes towards 85-89%. I am certainly not going to do anything that would push my income beyond 200K. So goodbye overtimes and extra loads. I doubt that most people would work for 10 cents on a dollar. I have not even included 10% state sales tax in these calculations. In exchange, Sanders proposes that somehow people will get more money, better and cheaper education, and better and cheaper health care. Unfortunately, US federal and state governments have so far failed to deliver their promises for all these services. Why do you think that this time it would be better?
4
"The United States has never been a socialist country". I agree. Way back in the day I even wrote a pretty good Senior History thesis on why the US could not be a socialist country. Essentially, socialism is not in the national DNA.
That said, Bernie Sanders is not a socialist. I have yet to hear or read that he advocates the government ownership and direction of industry, etc.
What Sanders is is a social democrat whose policy positions are much in the same vein as the New Deal and Great Society. Figuratively speaking, the same politicians and pundits who opposed FDR and LBJ are now opposing Sanders. And for the same reasons.
Today's Republicans have not forgotten the Gilded Age, what it meant to and for whom and how the select few profited by pitting the underclasses against each other fiscally, politically and socially.
9
Lots of strong arguments against Bernie, but somehow, despite all these "good reasons", Sanders just keeps climbing the polls and adding donors. I wonder how that could be?
Perhaps it's because a lot of these "good reasons" are seen as the scare tactics they are. And maybe it's because actual people out in real America don't think the economy is all that hot, and while MFA scares them, not being able to afford medical care and their prescriptions - even WITH the health insurance "they love"! - scares them more. Or maybe it's just that they're sick of all the phony promises made to them and see Bernie as authentic, and always sticking to his agenda: helping the "little guy", the same "little guy" FDR helped.
I strongly suggest that your set your fear aside Timothy and venture out into America and leave your "expert polls" back home. You might be shocked at what you see and hear.
7
"Bernie Sanders Can’t Win"
Nor should he.
There are three main reasons for this, in addition to the ones in this column.
1) He's too old. Sorry, but that's the truth, especially with his recent heart problems.
2) He wouldn't be able to stand up to Trump in a debate. He could hardly stand up to Hillary, who was a terrible debater. Trump would eat him alive.
3) He has no national or international security experience to make him qualified to be Commander In Chief.
Bernie is a great voice for Progressives. But he is not The One. The only Democratic candidate who can stand up to Trump is Joe Biden. Yes, he's too old, too. But he has the background and temperament to handle Trump well.
It's gotta be Joe.
5
Oh, this is so very, very right. And much the same can be said of Warren. It was completely predictable that the outrage of Trump would create an equal and opposition reaction among the Democrats -- and Bernie and Jane have been drinking the Kool-Aid of national ambition for so long that they cannot see the deep chasm for which they are headed, dragging down a generation of young idealists with them. I only pray that he fails, and soon.
5
I just read in Politico that some DNC members are trying to block Bernie Sanders by changing the voting rules so that super delegates can vote on the first vote along with the ballots already cast for each candidate to avoid the possibility of a brokered convention or a Sander nomination. This is what ticks off potential Democratic voters and makes them stay home. Apparently they have not learned their lesson from the HC fiasco. They do this and I am through with this party forever and I'm not even a Sanders supporter. I will look for a third party alternative.
14
@ Steve
I agree. I hope the DNC doesn’t try and pull that super delegates thing again.  If Sanders is going to lose the Democratic primary let him lose fair and square.  But if Sanders feels entitled or that it is “his turn,” that doesn’t usually work out very well. 
1
Solid advice to the Dems. The William Jennings Bryant analogy is spot on. To make a more recent reference, a Sanders nomination would be the 3rd act of the McGovern-Mondale show.
8
I agree with you, Mr. Egan. Bernie appeals to his base the same way Trump appeals to his, through emotion. That works to get a hard core group behind you but we need a centrist to appeal to us with empathy, reason, fairness, and honesty. We need someone to bring us together. We're probably looking at Biden as the person (of those still running) who best meets that description. We could do worse than Biden, especially if he chooses the right VP.
3
I don’t understand all this interest in the VP pick.
VPs don’t do that much. They don’t set policy. They don’t veto bills.
Did Al Gore as VP turn the Clinton administration into even a semi-green regime? Hardly. And it didn’t even get Gore elected in 2000.
The VP pick means little or nothing. It’s a cheap and easy way for a candidate to pay lip service to some issues or constituencies he or she doesn’t care much about.
3
@CJ
"...we need a centrist to appeal to us with empathy, reason, fairness, and honesty."
The implication that Bernie Sanders lacks any one of those things is ludicrous at best and manipulative at worst.
1
@CJ Do you not think that Warren can pull us together and get people to work with her?
https://www.newsweek.com/bernie-sanders-trump-poll-election-2020-biden-bloomberg-1483423
Bernie Sanders Leads Donald Trump by Widest Margin of All 2020 Candidates: Election Poll
The poll asked voters to choose between President Donald Trump and each Democratic candidate as though the election was being held today.
www.newsweek.com
The candidate Egan wants ran last time-- Hillary Clinton There is no "median voter"--90+% of Republicans are stuck to Trump like glue. Victory lies in mobilization of voters and Sanders is the ONLY one who can combine coastal liberals with Obama to Trump voters in key states.
Egan here distorts numerous of Sanders's positions; please leave that effort to Trump so that Sanders can refute them.
8
"The United States has never been a socialist country, even when it most likely should have been one, during the robber baron tyranny of the Gilded Age or the desperation of the Great Depression, and it never will be."
You say that as though Americans have ever had a real choice about it. In the two most rapacious eras you mentioned, not to exclude this latest version, the wealthiest and most powerful did everything in their considerable power - including the use of the government as their paid lackeys - to quell populist uprisings and unions. It's a testimony to the bravery and sacrifices made by common people that unions were formed and the beginnings of sharing the wealth via a progressive tax system were created. But these were fought tooth and nail by the "barons", and they never relented. From the day FDR signed his New Deal, the oligarchy stepped up their efforts to repeal it or cut it back. Their persistence has paid off as they're now seeing the rewards of their mission to dominate the rest of us.
But we live in another era, the era of mass and instant communications, and ideas and support for those ideas can be leveraged as they never could be before. Trump won because he convinced enough people that he would fight for them. It was an audacious and bald lie coming from an alleged billionaire, but people were so fed up with the Status Quo they bought it.
But Sanders is the real deal, and despite intense opposition from the Establishment, he's winning people over.
11
@Kingfish52 -- Would you choose him over Warren?
A recent Economist article says Americans vote for the person they like or person they think understands them. Bernie Sanders gets high points on these measures.
But most Democrats don't agree with his political positions. Only 38% of Democrats support Medicare for All. Open borders and tuition free college aren't widely supported among Democrats either. To select a candidate whose policies aren't supported by most of the party is insane.
Sanders is a recipe for Trump to win by a landslide. Trump is going to be hard to beat, even with a moderate.
6
I feel like the establishment Dems are more afraid of losing their party to Bernie and his supporters than they are of losing the country to the right. They really seem to be more interested in their own power than they are of helping the American people.
10
Dead on. It’s the Iron Law of Institutions.
Approaching red-baiting here. He's a democratic socialist, not a communist. He supports reform of American capitalism, not socialist or communist reform. Additionally health care expenditure of 1/6 of the economy is already 2/3 paid by the government. So that amounts to 1/18, but that neglects the benefits of long-term savings, better coverage, and better health that are projected. FDR shook things up, Obama did not, Bernie will shake it up for the better, again.
19
Nonetheless, I will vote Democrat for President even though the person I want will not be the candidate. In 2020, protest votes and 3rd party votes will hand the oval office back to Trump and that is the most dangerous candidate on the ballot.
5
He can win. Any of them (the candidates) can win.
Will they win? Questionable. Trump supporters are fired up and mobilized. Trump abuses his position and power to hold rallies at the taxpayers expense. Republicans gerrymander and the Russians meddle with our social media and voting system. It doesn't look good.
I'll be casting my lot for Elizabeth Warren or Pete Buttigieg, but if Bernie gets the ticket, he'll get my vote as well.
Anyone but Trump. Please, god, anyone...
8
Bernie's supporters apparently think he "will really get things done". I don't think so. Even if Bernie did somehow get elected, there are not enough Democrats in the House, much less the Senate, who would vote for most of his domestic program. A government that guarantees everything is a government that will ultimately own everything. America is about equality of opportunity, not equality of results.
3
@Gary: Bernie sure didn't place nice with Hillary.
I am terrified that Sanders may become the Jeremy Corbyn of the next American elections. A man so lost in his own worldview to ignore the fact that the majority of the people, no matter how progressively inclined, will not vote for his drastic and untested policy ideas.
The Labour Party in Britain was decimated by the foolish intransigence of their old socialist leader, Jeremy Corbyn, despite being in the best position in years to defeat the tories: discontent among the middle classes, the Brexit animosity, growing wealth inequality. Labour squandered an enormous political capital by presenting the most unpalatable, divisive and controversial candidate they could find. His rival Boris Johnson, although scandal-ridden, derided as a buffoon, despised as a populist demagogue, a liar and a cheat, easily destroyed Corbyn and his neo-marxist political message.
The risk for the Democrats is clear: elect Sanders in the primaries, and end up with the most monumental defeat in decades - and four more years of an emboldened, out-of-control Trump. Is it worth it?
14
And Eagan’s caricature of Sanders is tantamount to slander. Reductive in the extreme.
6
"Just 39 percent of Americans view socialism positively," declares Tim Egan.
Mr. Egan: That is nearly 4 in 10 Americans! It's hardly trivial.
4
@Chris Rasmussen
Or, the same number of Americans who support Trump...
2
Bernie cannot win. He will get creamed if he is the nominee.
?Bernie Sander’s is a “fire and brimstone” candidate? He advocates class warfare? He blames all our problems on “the billionaires”?
Seriously?
A candidate cannot even point out that every other advanced economy has found a way to fund universal healthcare without the New York Times saying he is too extreme.
Nobody can decry that the concentration of wealth in too few unaccountable hands is not a good way to make sure our society’s wealth is being put to good productive use without be branded as a ruthless extremist plotting to establish gulags or re-education camps.
Chomksy’s propaganda model is once again confirmed. “moderates” like Tim Egan can only go so far in decrying America’s lack of a decent healthcare system and a rigged economy - as long as they don’t support any meaningful policies or changes to a system so dead end that 40% of the electorate are willing to hand over the presidency to a degraded charlatan with no regard for truth, never mind the rule of law.
Some people vote for the likes of trimp because they are so frustrated with the “never mind ism” of people regularly published by the corporately owned New York Times. Even more people don’t believe the mainstream media can be trusted. But after all, we the people, are so mal informed and misguided. How are we to trust ourselves?
8
If Trump wins a second term, there won't be any grandchildren.
4
So forty thousand votes and fracking jobs outweigh two million votes in the usual zip codes. Good argument for a secession movement.
4
William Jennings Bryan? Is this guy serious?
These people are getting desperate.
8
Yes. Yes he can.
I may not agree with his lack of submitting his M4A bill for a vote and CBO analysis all these years but I will canvas for one month in WI and MI for the Blue candidate no matter who it is.
Get rid of the Grifter - all Blue 2020.
6
Hatred turned Bernie into a man of principle.
3
These articles are just meant to get The NY Times readers excited and logging on. This article is nothing more than cocktail party conversation. Bernie Sanders has an honest approach and wants a society that is fair. Look at Michigan: Trump did worse than prior Republicans, but HRC faired even worse than that....
10
@G
And Sanders won the Michigan primary, so Hillary actually lost twice there.
4
This red-baiting by the Times and other outlets is so tiresome and disingenuous. Please stop. Bernie is the one candidate who CAN win against Trump. The media need to stop marginalizing him to promote the corporate controlled choices like Biden, et al.
14
So many worn out tropes about Sanders, so little time. Sorry Egan, Clinton, DWS... the crowd seems to love him. Populist v populist might be your best match up.
10
Somehow this seems familiar...
7
The Chicago suburban voters who rejected their Tea Party Republican congressmen in 2018 may provide a clue. Voters elected Democratic Congresspeople in those districts who are solid, “un-Bernie”, mature, and wise. To those educated suburbanites, Mr. Saunders may bring back memories of the flaming leftists of the last century, consumed by sweeping, theatrical dreams of “change”, of the first ending up last, while the last end up first, and “Justice” is done.
Mr. Saunders probably can’t spell out how “Hugo Chavez Socialism” failed in Venezuela. Without that understanding, a far-leftist is dangerous
2
@Jim
One has to wonder how closely you've been paying attention. His name is Sanders, not Saunders.
Another corporate hit piece, another donation to the only candidate that matters -- Bernie 2020.
11
It's articles like these, especially from the NYTimes and CNN, that further galvanize the millions of us who support Bernie for the presidency.
14
There is no way sanders can win. Do you want the criminal for another four years?
3
At least the NY Times is consistent. Pundits and reporters alike do what you can to trash Sanders and give us another GOP Lite administration that will keep wealth flowing upward toward the unimaginably wealthy, and push the rest of us into serfdom.
14
First of all you don’t know if he can win or not, so stop predicting something you can’t really predict.
Also, I would expect much better from NYTimes op-Ed columnist
Piling up all socialism together doesn’t do any service for people who equate socialism with a red scare.
Venezuela or Russian style socialism has nothing to do with let’s say Scandinavian democratic socialism.
So instead of misinforming people take time critical discussion and maybe some Q&A time,
But first make sure you’re appropriately inform and studied the subject.
8
this whole discussion in the comments about moderate vs extremist misses the mark a bit, with its comparisons to 2016.
A better way to frame it is how do candidates poll in the swing states -- PA, MN, WS, IA, CO, NV, AZ, NM, NC, FL -- pick the one who does best there (not among democrats but among the general population) and you have the best chance to win the presidency. It is actually common sense that in these places (and you would know this if you've ever gone to these states as I have) a moderate has the best chance. Hillary Clinton was never perceived as a moderate by the majority of the country, even though she was. She was an extremely polarizing figure.
1
AOC, Ilhan Omar and Rashida Tlaib are fine Americans and good representatives of their districts. They are also poison in a general election. After the Republicans run it through their spin cycle, the simple fact that they openly endorse Sanders, will be enough to bring on electoral defeat.
6
Why is advocating a fairer taxation system “socialist “?
9
et tu Mr. Egan?
This is an absolutely false characterization of the Bernie Sanders campaign. Sanders is running to return to the same kind of country LBJ and FDR had. Where the government protected the interests of middle class and poor Americans instead of protecting the rich of the richest Americans on the backs of the middle class and poor.
Shame on you for repeating right wing mischaracterizations of what Bernie Sanders is running on.
380
The trouble is that Bernie self-describes as Socialist. And, as the article points out, Socialism polls dismally among the general population. That does not bode well for a Sanders run. The author is simply pointing that out.
32
@YN Bernie Sanders self describes as a Democratic Socialist, not a Socialist.
18
@RJ It doesn’t seem false to me. Bernie seems to think once he is elected he will wave a magic wand and everyone will magically fall in line behind him. We need to nominate someone who can attract moderates from both parties. You know Trump will cheat to the best of his ability. We can’t afford for this to be a close race.
24
Sanders and Biden both have the reverse image of the same problem. Sanders has extremely enthusiastic followers eager for change while Biden, who generates about as much enthusiasm as a casket salesman, has fans who want a return to the pre-Trump status quo. Neither wish is possible. But the real similarity is that too many of each candidate's core group won't turn out to vote for the other in a race against Trump.
3
I like Bernie, and I basically like his platform. And I will vote for him without hesitating if he ends up being the nominee. I could I not?
But Egan is right, I think. Once we are in the general election, it will be easy for Republican to caricaturize Sanders. He is a self-proclaimed "democratic socialist." There is not a single country in the world where democratic socialism has ever worked. You might think, "But what about the Scandinavian countries?" Well, those are NOT democratic socialist or any other kind of socialist countries. They are so-called "social democracies", free-market economies with a robust dose of social responsibility. The same is true for virtually all of the other Western European countries, including Germany, France, and the US.
I am at a loss WHY Bernie insists on the label "democratic socialist." I have read at least two articles that argue, convincingly, that is actually NOT a democratic socialist, but rather a social democrat. He wants the US to be more like Finland or Denmark, not Venezuela or North Korea.
Unless Bernie drops the label "democratic socialist", he will be toast in the general election. And I find it unlikely that he will do so, given his stubborn nature.
If you don't belive me, go and look up the difference between social democrat and democratic socialist yourself. It's a HUGE difference. The former is what the majority of Americans want, the latter, well, a stupid, unnecessary pipe dream that will go nowhere.
5
A Democratic President, ANY Democratic President, will be meaningless without a Democratic House and Senate.
4
It absolutely amazes me how gullible people are. Bernie has spent his whole life as a politician. Never even ran a lemonade stand. Knows nothing about how a market economy works and he is going to remake the largest economy in the world?
Hillary got it right - nobody likes Bernie and as a senator he has never done anything. Absolutely zero legislation passed.
People think it’s better in the countries that are labeled social democracies. It isn’t. Ever hear of the yellow jacket riots in France? Why do you Britain is leaving the EU?
All of programs he is offering the country he tried to enact in Vt and accomplished nothing. People are fools if they think more government is going to make all their problems go away.
5
Stop already. Just stop. Is the NY Times an arm of the RNC? Because if Sanders does happen to win the nomination, you will have given them an incredibly head start. The words 'self-fulfilling prophecy" come to mind. This is an outrage.
6
@thebigmancat
The “educated suburbs” was what the local press called those greater Chicago districts that kicked out the Tea Party Congressional Representatives in 2018. We have wise Democrats in those seats now. They helped the House of Representatives expose the “New GOP Darkness”. Can you imagine what would be happening if they weren’t elected?
Don’t push back against this fragile path to a Left of Center America. Fantasy filled stuffed politicians come and go. Some even stop wearing their fake Tea Party Colonial uniforms and fade away. If you pardon the expression, “Making America Healthy Again” should bring both of us together. Together, maybe for the last time, but that’s okay too. Look, we gotta win this war.
Bernie supporters trash every other Democratic candidate constantly. It doesn’t seem like they share your concern.
2
Why has the Republican Senate so slavishly rallied to support Trump? Do they not believe in democracy? Do they enjoy Trump's crass behaviour? Do they like his racism?
No. They've rallied behind him because they are supported by rich donors—while they are in the Senate and later, in their careers after the Senate—who want nothing more than tax cuts and deregulation to help build their fortunes.
We don't need to attack the rich because we loathe them. We need to attack them to defend ourselves and our children from their depredation. They control our government in their interest and against ours.
Bernie and Warren understand that money has corrupted our nation and given the predatory few too much power. They are destroying our lives, our children's lives, and our democracy.
It's not loathing. It's not personal. It's merely self-defence.
7
I wouldn't call it Class Loathing as much as trying to make a more equitable future for all . . and yes, at a bit of the expense of the 1.0%.
But I agree, Bernie cannot not win a national election with the Trump/Republican/Fox Lie Machine going into a full scale blitz on him if he should be nominated.
Bloomberg is the best possible candidate to defeat Trump and his machine of enabler liars.
4
The highest vote a socialist has ever received in a U.S. presidential election is 6%. (https://bit.ly/2SaRNu3) Last May, a Harris Poll found that 59% of people *who voted for Clinton against Trump in Nov. '16* wouldn't vote for an avowed socialist. (https://bit.ly/2GJviXO)
I'm not saying nominating Biden wouldn't come with its own Clinton/Kerry/Gore-ish risks. It sure would -- though perhaps less so for Klobuchar or even Bloomberg, who are at least somewhat fresh on the national scene.
That said, if your success requires convincing tens of millions of Americans of something big *that they don't already believe,* in the face of billions of dollars of sophisticated propaganda, your strategy is VERY high risk. So, too, if it requires convincing them to do something they've never done (e.g., vote).
I personally think 5-10 more years of capitalists behaving as they do, plus one more economic crash, will lead Americans to socialism on their own.
But, today, that word still scares millions of middle-aged-and-older suburbanites who ALWAYS vote. And, as a former DSA member myself, I doubt you can clarify the difference between "democratic socialism" and "something Venezuela-ish" to enough of them in the next 9 months. Are you confident you can? Based on personal experience?
Think seriously about what 4 more years of Trump will mean on climate change. Guns. Healthcare. Voting rights. The courts. Immigration. Equal rights. For our democracy. For you and those you love.
2
FDR did not have to weather the lies that will face Sanders should he be nominated.
Truth wasn't everything back then, but it could see everything from it's place in line. Now there is no truth on the conservative side. They will lie lie lie about Sanders till the break of dawn.
I don't think anyone person can weather that in the sphere of a Sanders.
Bloomberg can because he can bury the King Liar with a million truthful ads. And comping tax returns? Fahgetaboutit. Bloomberg wins that fight in 2 seconds flat.
7
I agree completely. Sanders strikes me as a humorless narcissist, a rigid ideologue who, because he will not compromise, would not get anything done even if he were elected. But I have an additional reason for not voting for Bernie: It would be cruel to send a 79 year old who just had a heart attack into the pressure cooker that is the White House. How would his supporters feel if he were to have another heart attack? I can't believe we're seriously considering this guy, though I would much prefer him over Trump.
8
Seriously you need to get a grip. You are effectively a shill for the same old policies of what has created the disparity you now enjoy. Join the crowd yelling about how we can't do the things every other 1st world country has done. Beat the drum about the good economy. Good for who? I assume you. Good for the top 20%, 30%. How about those who work all they can and can't make ends meet. How about those who worked hard all their lives and can't afford their medication let alone to retire. If you have enough to own stock and wise enough to ignore the stock pickers and choose no load index funds, or inherit lots of money - sure the economy is good. Otherwise, it pretty well stinks. The "normal" Democrats are bound to twiddle here and there with benefits and the economy (if they have both houses), but effectively they will dump us deeper into inequality and a failed economy that is good for the rich.
Please wake up!
6
PLEASE read this very interesting vanity faire article about Bernie Sanders https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2020/01/bernie-sanders-message-media-machine-could-be-potent-against-trump ... it’s actually the most sensible writing to date on the reason why Sanders popularity is so enduring as he continues to surge in the polls. The article is an amazing rebuttal to the Democratic Centrist refrain of “unelectable” (Hillary being one of the strongest supporters of this viewpoint, from someone who actually proved to be unelectable). The only democratic candidate who has won in recent memory was Obama, who ran on a platform of change and hope, since destroyed by the Trumpian/McConnellian cabal who absolutely refuse compromise of any sort and demonize and denigrate all who disagree with them. This is the new political system of America, and the article in Vanity Faire does a great job of exploding antediluvian myths about the supposed electability of Sanders. The mainstream centrist Democrats who have been playing the accommodation game for decades to support the economic status quo of the Beltway and our country have finally been put into the Sanders spotlight...who is REALLY going to change politics in America? Bernie or Biden...it’s an easy answer if we choose to look honestly at our country in its current form. https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2020/01/bernie-sanders-message-media-machine-could-be-potent-against-trump
3
Hey, Dems! Want to sink your only reasonable chance of beating Trump? Nominate The Bern. 60 percent of America strongly dislikes Trump, but like Douhan says, 87 percent of us like Capitalism. Nominate a grumpy old Communist like The Bern, and we will get whipped, perhaps even annilihated, maybe as bad as Mondale or Dukakis did. Dems have a real knack for nominating liberal-leaning policy wonks; this works well on Harvard Square but is roundly rejected everywhere else. If we lose this election with The Bern, we have no one to blame but ourselves.
6
“Just 39 percent of Americans view socialism positively, a bare uptick from 2010, compared to 87 percent who have a positive view of free enterprise, Gallup found last fall.” In the US, opposing socialism and free enterprise is king of mental disease. Look at Denmark.
3
I understand where you're coming from, Mr. Egan. You probably relate to Bill Gates & Jeff Bezos on a first name basis. Your desire to avoid 'class warfare' in your political expression will allow you to avoid hard feelings next time you cross paths with men who command your admiration & respect.
If not for people like yourself offering props, they might end up paying the same tax rate as their secretaries. We know how that would disturb your relationships.
For all those progressives not caring a whit for the job creators,the wealth builders, try walking a mile in Mr. Egan's shoes.
4
Contrary to the author’s suggestion, socialism is popular in the United States - corporate socialism (“corporate welfare”) is one such variety. After all, there is a never-ending supply of corporate executives feeding like pigs at the taxpayers’ trough (and the shareholders’ trough). Opposing that situation is not “class loathing,” as he puts it. It’s insisting upon accountability and fairness.
7
The author is one of those soothsayers who predicted Hillary would win. Look what happened there. It's just like those self appointed geniuses on CNBC etc who will vehemently announce their favorite picks on stock market every day without much results. Anyway,its time people use their own judgement and intelligence when it comes to voting and not be brainwashed by these ignorant pundits. Bernie is on the upswing now and USA will change for the better if he wins. Finally, the words "we the people " will seem relevant. At the moment,everything is working only for a few and not for all of "us".
7
"Meaningful change is unrealistic, so we should just give up and die"
- Timothy Egan
5
Try explaining that Bernie isn't a Communist instead of repeating lies about him.
6
Here we go, here is the negative bias that I expect from the MSM, the Times included. Even so-called progressive outlets are piling on and demonizing the most progressive candidate this (and last) cycle. This painting of Sanders as a socialist commie is ignorant at best, and propaganda at worst. Let's just let the elites continue to get their way at the expense of the rest of us.
6
Based on George Soros piece in today’s Times it appears whoever allows the most Facebook workers to imbed in their campaigns will win.
An important point. It’s unfortunate that Soros piece wasnt allowed on line comments.
Zuckerberg appears to be Trumps greatest asset now. Delete Facebook!
5
Bashing billionaires and Donald Trump is a sure recipe for defeat.
2
Because Mr. Egan got it so right last time I guess. I think the word that applies is chutzpah.
4
When Biden or Buttigieg goes up against Donny and Donny wins, I'm going to hold mainstream neoliberal Democrats like Timothy Egan personally responsible. The Democratic establishment has been sabotaging and undermining Bernie from day one. He's the one candidate who has principles and a vision he wants to fight for. He's the only one with actual charisma and a non-negligble chance of beating Donny. This asinine fear of reform is going to be the doom of us all. The mainstream Democrats like Biden are selling themselves on a return to the status quo of the Obama and Clinton years even though there were a lot of serious problems then that needed to be addressed (IE, Obama bailing out the banks who caused the recession, Obama's drone strikes that killed civilians, Clinton's crime policies that targeted the poor and disenfranchised, etc). It's just not feasible. The general public is fed up with the establishment and they don't want a return to the status quo. They want some kind of change, and they're going to go to Donny for it because the Democrats san Bernie aren't offering any. Timothy Egan, Bret Stephens, and David Brooks are playing directly into Donny's hands by writing these disingenuous hit pieces.
I get the sense that the Democratic establishment would prefer for Donny to get reelected than for Bernie to win. Bernie's proposed reforms would chip away at the graft and corruption accumulated by both parties.
4
There's more to "Doctor" Jane than bankrupting Bennington College. The Republican oppo researchers will bring up the woodworking shop, Jane's alma mater (the sketchy diploma mill where Michelle Bachman's husband also received a Ph.D.) etc.
Another embarrassing couple after Donald and Melania?
Old Bernie can't win. I hope Mike Bloomberg can!
5
He will do better than H. Clinton did 4 years ago. And better than the pitiful current list Dem pols.
Don't you get it? The people want a real alternative; thats why they voted for Trump. Bernie is a real alternative.
Give him a chance and he will rake Wall Street and the corrupt corporations.
That is what you are really afraid of , no?
5
Egan is right. The election will be won or lost in a handful of battleground states, where far left candidates are less popular. Nominating a "socialist" will mean a bigger victory in the deep blue coastal cities and a bigger defeat in the electoral college. And you'll never win a national election by promising to take away the health insurance of 150 million people, no matter how much you promise that the replacement will be better. Its the old proverb "a bird in hand is worth two in the bush".
3
Timothy, perhaps you hadn't noticed, but Democratic primary efforts are futile, at best.
We have a President who can neither be indicted nor impeached/convicted. A President who can take any action with impunity, so long as it is "good for the country."
We now have not only a President but a Monarch. Our King will marshal any and all resources within and without the government to ensure that the next election results are "good for the country."
And note that when/if we ever have a regime change (no sure thing), that new Monarch will gladly accept the precedents and powers which have been established by King Trump.
Our experiment with democracy (OK, with a republic) was good while it lasted ...
5
Tim Egan: I think it might be better to state, instead of "Bernie Sanders Can’t Win", something that allows that he could win, such as "Bernie's winning is an uphill struggle" or something similar. Your categorical certainty me of your colleague Paul Krugman, stating in 2016 that the stock market would steeply fall if Trump were elected. As we know, until recently it has been hitting record highs.
I lost most of my respect for Paul because of this. Don't fall into this trap, please.
4
"That’s the thing about class loathing: it feels good, a moral high with its own endorphins, but is ultimately self-defeating. A Bernie Sanders rally is a hit from the same pipe: Screw those greedy billionaire bastards!"
Pathologizing resistance by those suffering due to unaffordable healthcare, crummy low wage jobs and debt; making a cartoon of their anger at the rich and political elites who tell them their feelings are a pathetic drug...
...that's the thing about social class condescension: you're not only fundamentally morally indifferent to the suffering of the vast majority - you know better than they do the infantile and pitiable attitudes drive them.
4
I read all the Times pick comments. Except for one or two, they all admired Bernie sanders. And didn't care if we (Democrats) lose in November, with Bernie at the helm!
I admire Bernie. His ideas are now about mainstream Democratic ideas. He's a senior politician. He should be revered. But he should not be nominated. For one thing, he's already 78, will be 80 in the first year in office, if elected. He did have a heart attack. He could have more of it with stress of the presidency. And Joe Biden also is old.
Go for a winning candidate. Either Amy Klobuchar or Pete Buttigieg can win, BEATING Donald trump.
Be realistic.
4
I woke us this morning and my first thought was that the Warren and Sanders camps would not vote for anyone but their own fearless leaders and it would cost the Democrats the election - again. Wang, Buttigieg and the rest need to call it a day and help the Democrats focus. The sooner we get one candidate to get behind the better for the party and the country.
1
"Bernie Sanders Can’t Win"
That's what they said about Trump. Nobody can say this for certain. And be believed.
6
Unfortunately this column, like so many in this newspaper, deals with facts which do not appear to be considered in the areas where they count.
The subsidies handed out early in his Presidency to those in the nation's midwest branch of the electoral college, not only may, but in all likelihood will return our would be king to his throne.
Mr Egan, have you thought for a second how your position might possibly be informed by an Elite mentality, a desire to preserve the status quo rather than truly fix glaring problems? Medicare for all, free college tuition, serious environmental policy are not even close to pinko-wacko socialist politics. Are you thinking he's going to try to nationalize the car industry, or what? Is it just the label that bothers you? And how come you didn't mention FDR?
5
Mr. Egan isn't worried about Bernies past dalliances with communists. I am.
There are films of Bernie with Sandinista president Daniel Ortega at a parade in Nicaragua. Bernie invited to Vermont a Sandinista Mata Hari, Nora Astorga, who lured a Somoza general to her apartment. The general's throat was slashed, and his body was wrapped in a Sandinista flag and dumped. There are films and tapes of Bernie praising Fidel Castro and Che Guevara.
If he's the nominee, the Republicans won't just be calling him a socialist; they'll be calling him a communist. That won't bother Bernie's hard-core followers, any more than Trump's multiple disqualifications bother his cultists. But it will bother enough voters to doom Bernie's campaign.
Democrats who imagine otherwise are living in a fool's paradise. His support from one-in-four Democrats in Iowa hardly represents a large enough slice of the American electorate that it should convince a logical person of Bernie's electability -- especially when Republicans are cagily lying in the weeds and holding their fire.
1
Today the Republicans spat on our Constitution. Although many news commentators are sad, they invariably excuse their behavior: "he's afraid of being primaried," "she's afraid of Trump's Twitter invective," "he's afraid of losing his seat" as if any of these "fears" compare to the fears of Americans who will lose their homes to climate change or their life savings to get their kids through college. Millions of Americans don't have $400 for an emergency, but I'm supposed to feel sad for Cory Gardner? The thing about Bernie is that he has always been courageous. He has never been owned by anyone, and he has always stood for the right things, whether fashionable or not. Listen to him tell off Duke Cunningham on the floor of the House for his homophobia years before most politicians could even acknowledge the rights of gay people. Listen to him break through the sanctimonious hypocrisy of the Clinton impeachment by reminding Congress that they were sent to DC to fight for healthcare and save Social Security. In the next year we will suffer the unimaginable effects of Republican cowardice. I bet tens of millions of us will be ready by then to vote for the bravest politician in our country. Bernie is the only one we can count on.
3
Let's keep Bernie in the Senate. His age and health should preclude him from being President. Moreover, he doesn't listen, he won't compromise (which won't work with Congress), and his plans are unrealistic for a country with a $1 trillion annual deficit and a shaky economy. There is a reason he was defeated when he ran for governor of Vermont -- he would make a bad executive.
3
This piece is misleading. Sanders does not identify as as a socialist, but as a democratic socialist, basically the same thing as a Social Democrat in my "other" country, Sweden. He does not oppose free enterprise.
Free enterprise is thriving in Sweden and in the other Social Democratic Scandinavian countries - hand in hand with the social safety net, universal health care, free higher education, subsidized daycare, over a year of paid parental leave, sick leave, long paid vacations and many other benefits.
Unlike here, corporations and the wealthy pay their fair share of taxes - and taxes on the working- and middle classes are comparable to the taxes we pay here. Sanders suggests we implement a similar system of taxation, which will pay for the benefits he espouses, but he does not wish to abolish free enterprise.
Once again, this piece is truly misleading.
412
If you think Mr. Egan's characterization of Bernie's socialism is distorted, wait till you see how the Republicans distort it if Bernie's the nominee.
This is the problem. If you think you can trust a sufficient majority of American voters to vote logically based on facts, you must have slept through the 2016 election. Look who's in the White House, largely because incessantly screaming "Hillary's emails!" enabled the Republicans to neutralize the Democratic nominee's support in battleground states.
I'd love for the United States to emulate the system in Nordic countries, socialism funded by a healthy capitalist economy. I also wanted a horse when I was a kid. I didn't get one.
45
If young voters see a reformist Socialist such as Sanders again unfairly denied victory, they will abandon the electoral system for revolutionary Socialism.
7
@Wendy
Problem with his choice of terminology is when an American sees the word "socialist" they automatically recoil and equate it with communism.
Bernie is at fault here because he is ignoring the number one fundamental of a politician using terms.... don't use terms that trigger people, period.. unless your intention IS to trigger people.
I get Bernies position in his use of the term Social Democrat .. but most Americans frankly do not.. and THAT is a problem for someone running for president. Of course being a stubborn old curmudgeon.. he won't budge and just keeps doubling down. In that regard.. he messages exactly in the same style Trump does..just the message is different.
24
Mr. Egan, you wrote a great column, but it won't change the minds of the Bernie Bros, or those who sympathize with them and keep saying we need "fundamental change". Their minds are made up, and no amount of reasoning will change them. Only the bitter taste of defeat will wake them up, and even then they'll blame defeat on opinion writers like yourself.
Best of luck with the flames you're going to experience on social media.
3
I'm not a "Bernie Bro", as Mr. Egan asserts, but I do support a wide range of his positions, which have, time and again, proven to be on the right side of history.
I don't think we should tax the wealthy into oblivion. But, you know, even when the top marginal rate was 70%, we somehow still had plenty of wealthy people.
Bernie isn't a socialist, or even a democratic socialist, though he likes to call himself one. He's a social democrat, a mainstream, boring old European just left-of-center social democrat. But Bernie knows that calling himself that won't get anyone worked up enough to donate, or call, or go door-to-door.
Bernie advocates taxing ourselves enough to provide the basic services that we all deserve as human beings. He advocates a living wage, that no one should starve or be homeless working an hones 40-hour week.
That seems pretty darn basic and centrist to me, and to many others, too. Perhaps you caught him on Fox, where they put him in front of an audience of their viewers and the hosts found themselves with a room full of Bernie supporters.
Yeah, Bernie can win. You bet he can.
7
Mr Egan,
There's absolutely no reason to believe your predictions are correct.
Bernie Sanders CAN win.
7
This column is misleading. Sanders is not advocating socialism, just some reforms to the existing system, similar to what they have in European countries, where people pay about the same taxes we do here and have a much higher quality of life and social safety net, including retirement and long-term care. Also, if health INSURANCE is one-sixth of the economy, as Egan claims, well, it's no wonder the system so badly needs an overhaul.
4
Granting for a moment that the premise of this column is valid, who is the alternative?
The gaffe prone and grabby, bumbler who is coming under increasing scrutiny for the way his son leveraged his last name for financial gain?
The folksy wonk, with the weird fake Cherokee background, whose electoral base is the liberal coastal elite?
Those are the other candidates with a realistic shot. I don't get what separates Sanders, as any more fundamentally unelectable than these two.
Like Biden, and Warren, Sanders has electoral vulnerabilities- namely his age, his thick Jewish Brooklyn accent, and his limited ability to excite black voters - but they are no more glaring than those of his rivals. To boot, going for Sanders is that he's a gifted and relentless campaigner with proven crossover populist appeal. In other words, an excellent fit for the current political moment.
Finally, the premise of the article is not valid. Sanders is not animated by hatred of the ultra rich, but rather by concern for the well being of everybody else and the planet. The political revolution Sanders' calls for is not about ushering some socialist fantasy. Rather, it's about curbing the undue influence of the wealthy and powerful on government in order to allow government to serve in the public interest.
5
Is someone who is Pro-Choice, who wants to save the planet from Climate change, who wants sensible Gun Control, who wants a $15 living wage, who wants to lower prescription drug prices, who wants to increase affordable health insurance coverage is considered “a moderate” then what’s wrong with a Moderate?
I’m voting for Mike Bloomberg
8
@Patricia Brown
Me too!
2
Another centrist voice engaged in putting a false label on Senator Sanders's policy. This is not class warfare. It is about fair political power and economic justice. With the top 1% owning 50% of this country's wealth and this half a calamity away from bankruptcy, something is amiss.
Thomas Paine noted: "Man [or woman] did not enter society to be worse off, or to have fewer rights, but rather to have those rights better secured."
Perhaps FDR's 4 FREEDOMS would set a better example what Bernie Sanders also stands for. He is not out to eliminate rich people, but should do their part to improve the lot of citizens in this nation: "people in all nations of the world shared Americans’ entitlement to four freedoms: the freedom of speech and expression, the freedom to worship God in his own way, freedom from want and freedom from fear." The status quo ensures the opposite.
5
As soon as Egan tees up to answer why he thinks Bernie can't win, he resorts to the stickiest cliche of them all by citing a poll that sought the favorables for "Free Enterprise" as opposed to "Socialism". (Surprise! People don't like the idea of "Socialism"...) Perhaps if the question was "Do you approve of Bernie Sander's version of Social Democracy?" the numbers would be (dramatically) different. Just perhaps.
4
I can see Bernie’s strong appeal with some voters in the pivotal states of Wisconsin and Michigan. Bernie’s economic-based message could really resonate with some of those voters, tapping into the same populist resentment trump did.
Elsewhere in the country, especially amongst socially conservative voters, a non-religious or atheistic person from a jewish background could present an issue. Those things shouldn’t matter, but a lot of people still care about that, especially in Midwestern and Southern states. And even if socially conservative Democrats don’t vote trump, they may not turn out at all, which could make all the difference in places like North Carolina or Florida.
To the extent Bernie has an issue, I think it may be more with his background and social views than his economic beliefs.
1
As I've been saying all along, for liberal and progressive-minded Democrats, a vote for Sanders is one of the heart; not of the head.
Simply put, nominating Sanders in 2020 is even worse than was choosing McGovern in 1972. If the Democrats nominate Sanders than a morally-challenged Republican incumbent will win in a landslide.
And it will be a landslide that will also most likely result in an overwhelmingly Republican House and Senate. It will be watershed election that will usher in an era that should strike fear into any liberal/progressive heart.
The Sanders defeat will be the right-wing counter-revolution that will undo both the civil rights reforms of the 1960's and much of the prior New Deal era.
The right-wing in America see itself as ascendant. If the Democrats nominate Sanders; they will be complicit in ensuring that rise.
8
Bernie's policies are really extensions to FDR's New Deal. Similar policies are successful in Europe and Canada. If framed clearly and repeatedly (Bernie is good at doing this!), most Americans will find themselves agreeing with those policies. Our own Social Security and Medicare, beloved government programs, can be considered "socialist."
I don't see Bernie's ideas as negative, but as positive. He's encouraging us to return to a taxation scheme closer to what existed in the 1950s and 60s of more sharing.
We need to invest in the public good by paying our fair share of taxes to fund public education, repair our crumbling infrastructure, reweave the social safety net, save the environment, etc. We don't need a culture that exalts the acquisition of wealth above all else and that, if allowed to continue, will gradually exclude all but the very rich from a comfortable, productive life.
I'm nearly 75 years old and find Bernie's speeches invigorating and inspiring.
9
You know who else couldn't win? Donald John Trump.
Bernie's not my top choice that's Elizabeth Warren. But they are a lot closer than you make out with most of the difference being style and labels. The big mistake is letting fear of Trump driving us into the arms of another poor candidate with a great resume. Extreme times call for bold measures and if it isn't going to be Elizabeth then Bernie will do just fine.
7
Mr Egan claims that Trump supporters will come together to unite against the concept of "a political revolution." Therefore, Mr. Egan believes that Bernie Sanders doesn't stand a chance. Wasn't the election of Donald Trump exactly that? A political revolution. Timothy Egan offers no new insights to how the electorate has changed in the last 4 years and keeps espousing the same Democratic talking points that didn't get Hillary Clinton elected in 2016. Maybe it's time for change.
5
First time I totally disagree with Egan. The DNC is ruled by the money men and back by NYC media companies. I want Bernie to change this country for the 99%.
8
@Loretta Murphy: The DNC evidently doesn't even have a platform committee to give cohesion to the party's message.
If the objective is Trump's defeat, run the eloquent gentleman from California who presides with such elegance.
2
If a person is even CONSIDERING voting for Trump, I would argue that all that person needs to hear is how much Bernie's plans are going to cost taxpayers (even if the numbers aren't accurate), and that person will automatically become a Trump voter.
Or maybe they just have to hear the word "socialist" six or eight times! That would do it as well.
So, the question isn't how to get Trump supporters to change their minds, but what will lead the people in the middle away from Trump.
I like Bernie, but I think he can't get those middle people.
I don't think the Dems problems has been offering centrist candidates--I think their problem was simply offering Hillary as a candidate. I'm sorry if that sounds harsh, but she had too many negatives with too many people, even if a lot of it wasn't her fault.
Meanwhile, Trump will do ANYTHING to discredit Biden, but Biden still doesn't have the negatives--not like Hillary.
Run a guy without negatives (or too many "radical" ideas) and Trump will look even worse to more people than he already does.
If this sounds like a cop out, I think of it more as a commentary on the sad state of our political discourse and amount of critical thinking--plus the sense of threat and uncertainty that so many people feel today.
5
The most interesting and understated sentence in this piece is that "just 39 percent" view socialism positively. The people who lived in the former Soviet Union and/or GDR probably wouldn't have mustered such a high percentage - it's really surprising. I guess that this is the result of poor education standards. Nobody seems to know what socialism is. Republicans think that countries with universal healthcare are socialist (ridiculous) while many young people who view socialism positively think that it has something to do with Scandinavia (incorrect). Time to go back to school, folks.
7
@The Hawk: The US public does not understand that public sectors of mixed economies evolved to conduct socialism. That is what taxation to spend does. The benefits tend to flow to more influential recipients, but it is still socialism.
You know who else couldn't win? Donald John Trump.
Bernie's not my top choice that's Elizabeth Warren. But they are a lot closer than you make out with most of the difference being style and labels. The big mistake is letting fear of Trump driving us into the arms of another poor candidate with a great resume. Extreme times call for bold measures and if it isn't going to be Elizabeth then Bernie will do just fine.
7
The other candidates think the finances of the federal gov are similar to the family finances they discusses around the kitchen table. A HUGE difference is that thru the FED the federal gov can create as much money as wants out of thin air. It does not need to borrow or tax to pay for gov operations. Unless you have a printing press in your basement, you cannot do this.
Federal deficits & debts are nothing to worry about & in fact, are necessary. ALL 6 times we have eliminated deficits & paid down the debt 10% or more, we have fallen into a terrible real depression. Since prices are proportional to the amount of money in the economy (times its velocity), creating too much money could cause excessive inflation. BUT prices are also inversely proportional to the amount of goods and service we can produce. A bumper wheat crop LOWERS wheat prices. And that is what FDR's policies did. They increased production while getting more money to the people who needed it and would spend it.
Of course, if the economy is constrained and you can't produce any more, this will not work. E.g., if you just lost a war, and you did not have enough arable land to grow food to feed your people, and had no money to buy food, and your people were starving, printing money is just going to result in billion mark stamps.
But that is certainly NOTHING like our situation today when production could be vastly increased if people only had more money to buy stuff, & new money comes from federal deficits.
4
Nice way to highlight demagogic attacks on Bernie by spending so much time "dismissing" them. You even managed to use the term "Bernie Bro" uncritically, as if it were an accurate depiction of Sanders supporters. Unfortunately, that ad hominem sleight-of-hand doesn't leave you much room to make your case. Perhaps you should watch less HBO for political insight and read more?
I think Socrates put it best: "I know that I know nothing." I have no idea who the best or safest candidate to beat Trump is. Neither does anyone else. We don't have facts about who can or can't win anymore (if we ever did), only agendas. Yours is pretty clear.
I'd like to see just one moderate candidate put forward a serious plan to tackle climate change that is equal to the threat. At this point, corporate sponsored incrementalism is anything but "moderate" or "centrist," it's an extreme form of denial that is rapidly pushing us towards global collapse.
That's the thing about Bernie: to many of us, he's not the radical one.
9
@Chris Actually, Socrates said he was "wise" because he knew that he didn't know. Read the Apology by Plato. I taught it in Greek at the college level. Next.
3
Once again, the Times reminds us that there's no way Bernie can win. Unfortunately, the opinion writers are wrong.
Who adores their private health insurance plan so much that they'd turn down a chance at health care that can't be lost if the employer outsources the job or closes down? I don't know anyone who has Aetna tatooed on their arm framed by a heart.
I don't know anyone who would rather pay $30K a year for their children's college education than be able to send their kids to college free. Does anyone here remember when state colleges in California, and City College here in New York, were free?
I think the only people who are against Bernie's policies are those who would rather do without than let everyone have the benefit.
14
The other candidates are persistently answering the question, "How would you pay for it?" by proposing new taxes that would bring in the cost of the program. This is kitchen table economics.
The idea that the federal gov has to pay for things, good & bad, with taxes or borrowing is just plain wrong. The gov doesn't need your money. It can (thru the FED) create as much as it needs out of thin air. Just think about where money you pay your taxes with came from in the first place. Unless you have a printing press in your basement, it originally came from the federal gov.
Of course, creating money has consequences, but that is entirely a different question. If the program greatly facilitates production, that will hold down prices since they are INVERSELY proportional to production. If we need to increase taxes at all, it may well be far less than the cost of the program.
I don't know if Bernie understands this, but it seems he is perfectly willing to propose programs without worrying about taxes. In addition, he has advisors (e,g, Stephanie Kelton) who do understand how the federal gov works. I don't see any such advising the others.
A reader from Boston called max neatly summed it up: "So many of our economic issues could be solved if people understood that the US cannot run out of money, and how hard it is to cause hyperinflation from gov spending alone."
This is why I support Bernie Sanders.
8
Here is a quick thought game: based on his approval ratings, which have been pretty constant for 3 years, roughly 40% of the electorate supports Trump, and want him to remain President. Does anyone think that 40% of the country wants Sanders to be President, with the remaining 20% spread over all the other candidates? Just as Trump has his base, Bernie has his, but the question is the size of Bernie's base, and whether they are spread over the states that determine the Electoral College.
4
Who is best to tell disaffected white men in Mid West that economy is rigged against them, and with second Trump term will usher either unaffordable health care or no health care coverage? Who is more able and authentic to address opioid crisis, support those who have lost and will lose their jobs because of trade and automation? Who will inspire the base and turn out? The evidence suggests that it would not be the centrist candidates whose campaign been funding largely Wall Street and billionaires. The only hope for Democrats, progressive and anyone who does want to see and live through additional 4 years of Trump is Sanders or Warren.
9
Mr Egan's critique of Sanders is not only condescending — "Look him up, kids" — but is completely devoid of any sympathy or even understanding of the current anxiety pulsing below the surface of most Americans. This includes concern about another economic downturn, the cost of education, war, opioid addiction, deaths of despair, the cost of health care, availability of mental health care, gun violence, and so much more.
I will add Mr Egan's opinion to other recent comments about Sanders:
• Chris Mathews said Bernie wouldn't help an injured person by the side of the road
• MSNBC legal analyst Mimi Rocah said that Bernie Sanders "makes my skin crawl"
• Noah Rothman questions Bernie's support for "anti-Semitic indulgences."
• Hillary Clinton said she isn't ready to say she'll support Bernie if he wins the primary
• Hillary Clinton said nobody likes Bernie
• Elizabeth Warren said Bernie told her a woman would be unable to become president.
• Women on "The View" said they believe Warren and Clinton
• Twitter attacked Bernie over Joe Rogan's endorsement
• Jonathan Chait said it would be an act of insanity to run Sanders against Trump
• Timothy Egan says Bernie Sanders Can't Win
281
Ok, and? Bottom line: Bernie cannot win the election in the USofA. Face it. That doesn’t mean anyone lacks empathy for the hardship of the populace. Check out other candidates who know a thing or two about that...firsthand. Anyway, empathy or lack thereof, toward a candidate is another subject. The issue at hand is: Bernie, 78 years old, cranky, shouting, far to the left cannot win against Trump across this land.
56
@WalterZ
I am concerned about ALL of the things you're concerned about and experiencing anxiety about them. And I think Sanders would make an abysmal president, and have thought so since the first time I heard him speak, before reading any opinions about him. My view of him has only tanked the more I get to know him.
His time has come and gone - he's had an enormous positive influence on our politics, but he will not win because he's not going to suddenly inspire all the centrists. I'm a life long Dem, an average Joanne so to speak, more liberal than centrist and I fear he will be the nominee.
49
@WalterZ, I also like Bernie. I supported him last term and then voted for Hillary in the election. But that was when we thought there was no chance that Trump could win. Now, electability over Trump is more important than what any of the candidates are promising. And nothing can be accomplished unless we also take the Senate. I have no favorites. I will wait until the primaries tell me who is most electable. Have patience. Support your favorite but commit to voting for whomever is chosen as the Democratic candidate.
50
Egan's concern about Sanders' honeymoon in Russia sounds pretty far out.
However, Bernie does worry me as more of a revolutionary than an Executive. He seems more at ease yelling than in administering.
I am with Warren who sees the same problems as Bernie but she's wanting to fix it, not tear it down.
5
I am constantly disappointed by the neolib opinions expressed by the Times. How can anyone in their right mind be advocating for the status quo right now? I'd like to see some solidarity coming out of these pages rather than desperate attempts to undermine a truly needed revolution to save the climate and redistribute the wealth.
10
While I personally favor Elizabeth Warren, I fear Mr. Egan is correct. A geriatric lefty with a bum ticker and a geriatric lefty with a good heart and excellent economic ideas -- too good to be accepted by those fed a steady diet of Trump hogwash -- aren't going to cut it. Dems must get the stars out of their eyes and choose someone who really will defeat Trump, namely one who has the women's vote and the African-American vote.
5
Yeah, much of Saunders' socialism pitch at best fuels folks' dislike for anyone earning more than themselves. But when push comes to shove at the ballot box most won't be able to pull the Saunders lever. They'll think OMG no way. Mind you, the homeless, the poor will pull it, should they decide to even vote.
4
Bernie can win you just have to have faith.
7
@KR Yes. He would be Jesus's fave for sure.
2
Remember when everybody said Trump could never win?
9
What, oh what, will the "Times" do with Tim when the leather comes ripping off the baseball of the faux-economy of this Disguised Global Crony Capitalist Empire -- which is only nominally HQed in, and merely 'posing' as our formerly "promising" and sometimes progressive country (PKA) America?
A very high percentage of the faux-profits in the ersatz economy is only producing 'magic dust' profits by dumping 'Negative Externality Costs' onto our government, our fellow citizens, and our dying environment. This sort of astonishing 20 & 21st century dark-side alchemy pump --- which turns not lead, but paper (CDOs. CDSs, and synthetic ETFs) along with oil, and WMDs into faux-profits is just about the be both exposed and exploded.
Of course, in the health insurance, oxymoronic "ethical drug" industry, and "Merchants of Death" [Bertran Russell] theater of operations deceits like Medicare Advantage (with its front loaded Ponzi scheme that would shock even Charles Ponzi himself) we 'the American people' are being "played" like rubes on a harp.
BTW, Tim, what is your posture on the $Trillion per year deficits that are projected out to 2050 under this inane and insane Emperor Trump and his looting 'crew'?
3
It’s Bernie’s supporters who really bother me. The Bernie bros who trashed Warren and Clinton. And the Russian trolls who supported him in 2016 according to the Muller investigation. Why let Putin’s two preferred candidates from 2016 go head to head in 2020?
As far as Bernie being consistent, some would say that consistency is the hobgoblin of a little mind.
6
The rallying cry of the far left is to demonize billionaires. How is that different from the rallying cry of Trump that demonizes immigrants??? Both are very elementary as let's "pick a common enemy" and everybody will rally behind me. The interesting thing is that both immigrants and billionaires are cornerstones that make our economy great.
3
Sanders will win for the same reason Trump won... disgust work the status quo. Trump said the words similar to Sanders. In particular,"Drain the swamp" and "big beautiful healthcare for everybody" far less expensive than it now is", and 'my tax plan is going to hurt me and rich people like me', and 'I can't be corrupted by big money campaign donations'.
The conditions that got Trump elected have only gotten worse. More wealth going to the financial elite, more political corruption. Trump, of course, as a sociopath, was lying. He had done the opposite of his promises above.
Sanders means what he says. The socialist phobia the establishment tried to cling to is virtually dead. Everyone understands the basic nuance of 'socialist' in our current context as more public benefits within a better regulated capitalist system. But the single most important part is the drain the swamp/end systemic corruption piece. Everything good will follow from that. And nothing good can until it is cleaned up.
8
Surprise, surprise! the NYT editorial page once again coming out with the pitchforks again for Bernie. I'm amazed at the large number of supposed liberals who look down upon the rest of the country on issues of social justice but - when it comes down to it - are not willing to make any personal financial sacrifices for the greater good (just another form of NIMBY). Bernie is the Bob La Follette for our new gilded age.
9
A ban on fracking is a poison pill in a must win state like Pennsylvania? Don't Pennsylvanians deserve clean air and water as much as the rest of us?
Addressing climate change is the biggest issue of our day. The Green New Deal proposes good-paying jobs for working-class folks like insulating buildings, installing solar arrays and wind turbines and green roofs, planting trees, building bike trails and high-speed rail, growing food with restorative agriculture. This is how the Democrats win Pennsylvania and Michigan and Wisconsin. Bernie is the one to do it.
8
Bernie is great, but is easily portrayed as an extremist to moderate voters. And, progressive though he is, he remains fairly rigid. The so called "moderate" Democrats are very progressive in their agendas--but they make clear, they are not rigid--that is, they are flexible when it comes to improvements if they have to be. Yes, Obama is and was a progressive, but in so many ways, was blocked by Republicans--as will the next Democratic President. Bernie is also really old as is Biden--too old this this stressful office. But it's important to remember that all the Democratic candidates are really wonderful--I'd be proud to work for and support anyone of them.
3
Let's look at the bottom line on health care. Here is a simple calculation. The CBO says we spent $3.65 TRILLION last year for healthcare. Long term medical inflation is 5.25%. That means in the next 10 years, we will spend in excess of $50 TRILLION if nothing changes.
Before you ask me how will we pay for M4A, tell me how will we pay for that. In fact, There have been 5 or 6 estimates of the 10 year costs of Bernie's M4A. NONE of the estimates of the costs of M4A comes anywhere near $50 TRILLION. The highest is less tham $35 TRILLION.
What about "Medicare for all who want it"? All of the plans are so vague there has been no estimate of their costs by experts, just wild guess by the candidates. The public option is just an ADDITION to our present mess of a system. I would bet that when you add up all the costs for the next 10 years it is even HIGHER than $50 TRILLION.
Then there is simple morality. I would like to know:
How many people must unnecessarily die because they could not get the care that would have saved their lives (that figure is 200,00 per year, look up amenable mortality)?
How many families have to go bankrupt and possibly go on drugs or suicide because they can't pay for medical care (there are 530,000 medical bankruptcies each year)?
How many people have to skip their meds because they cannot afford both meds and food?
before we can complete a step-by-step path to an efficient, universal government run system?
I really would like to know.
6
Americans have always rejected class warfare.
That's why socialist parties have never been more than fringe movements, in contrast to Europe.
Why? Perhaps because Europe has had hereditary aristocracies, enshrined in titles of nobility. Although rich Americans pass their wealth to their descendants, we don't have the in-your-face insult of inherited titles. We also have an explicit ideology of "all men are created equal" and a culture that values the self-made man who rises from humble origins (born in a log cabin) to wealth or the Presidency. Redistributionist policies can be popular, but not explicit socialism.
5
I like a lot of Bernie’s ideas, but I just can’t take the grumpy old man persona. If he’s the nominee, I’ll vote for him, but I’m not sure he can handle tRump in debates. I’m not looking for a pure candidate, but I think Bernie has too much baggage. Also, I have to agree with others who have pointed out that Bernie’s supporters won’t vote for anybody other than Bernie. Young people need to understand what is at stake in this next election. We must get tRump out of office. Vote blue!
6
Sanders is unappealing to most mainstream Dems and, which makes sense, as he isn't actually a Dem. Why would I, as a Dem, vote for a populist from the Left, after this disaster of a populist from the Right? Populist political movements, most of the time, lead to catastrophe.
11
Why is anyone assuming we're going to have a fair and free election this year? Perhaps we will (to an extent), but I wouldn't count on it.
1
This column is correct. Sanders is McGovern, not just W.J Bryan. Sanders is Corbyn, and even Corbyn was a bit more cerebral. Sanders has no chance to win and may give back the House to the GOP as well.
9
What most ails us as a country is our terrible, mean spirited divisiveness. Bernie has not shown the capacity for seriously engaging with those who don't agree with his orthodoxy. Even if he were to squeak out an electoral college win, it will prove politically infeasible for him to impose his agenda on the majority of Americans who are not in his socialist camp. To impose the changes he seeks would require that there be a Great Depression similar to that which Roosevelt confronted. That isn't taking place now. He will scold and rant, but achieve little and leave us in a worse place.
5
If a pie represented the estimated $98 trillion of household wealth in the United States, nine pieces, or 90% of the pie, would go to the wealthiest 20% in the country, according to a National Bureau Of Economic Research study of household wealth trends in the united states from 1962 to 2016. Out of those nine slices, four would go to just the top 1%.
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/income-inequality-in-america-how-98-trillion-of-household-wealth-is-distributed/
4
During the 2016 primaries after Sanders lost to Clinton by a single percent in Iowa and trounced her in New Hampshire the NYT, surprisingly, ran a major story announcing, as they do here, that Sander's nomination was an impossibility. A story which was, fairly obviously, meant to 'push' public opinion more so than to inform it. This is more of the same.
Case in point - the disparaging of socialism without any attempt to clarify it vis-a-vis Sanders' policies is pure demagoguery, straight from the soulless playbook of cold-hearted conservative.
9
@Ravi Masand Indeed, small wonder the degree of inequality in a country when its "journal of record" has no time for the dispossessed and a corrupted democracy on the verge of collapse. Journalists are a bought species as Aaron Sorkin has shown us so well in the The Newsroom.
Bernie would wipe the floor with Trump in a debate. Firstly, if Trump tries to play the tough New Yorker, Bernie will eat him for breakfast. Secondly, Bernie is a straight shooter and will be a sharp contrast to the Liar in Chief. Thirdly, Bernie has loyal supporters and everyone who ever works for Trump and resigns will come out of the woodwork to contradict his lies.
Bernie needs to plan carefully his running mate to show he can compromise by picking someone who will take a more moderate approach.
7
The amount of effort that’s going into destroying Sanders is breathtaking. Sanders is nothing more than a latter day new dealer. I suppose that if FDR showed up now he couldn’t win. I’ve been told all my life that I need to settle for someone who’ll take a little less away from me than the other “worser” guy but I got Trump and his cohort anyway. We also got a world hurtling toward the fascism I thought ended with the Second World War. Fascism is easy, democracy is hard. All I can do is support the most democratic guy of the sorry lot on offer.
7
So disappointing to see Timothy Egan joining the Times anti-Sanders campaign; I had hoped for better from the editorial writer I most respect.
Anyway, if Mr. Egan doesn't believe in class, or thinks it's unimportant, there's no point arguing--we live in different worlds.
But--
The unrelenting attacks on Sanders by the Times perplex me: you editorial writers know perfectly well that Sanders poses no actual threat to the wealthy, to democracy, to American interests in the world. And if he does, what are they? More taxes on the rich--why not? Health care for all?--About time. Free college?--why shouldn't my bright children have the same chance as everyone else's?
Read Sanders's position papers--they are the politics of old-fashioned liberalism, before it married the Clinton-Obama pragmatists and became Republicanism-lite.
And why is someone who is second in the polls, closing on Joe Biden, who received 13 million primary votes in 2016 (to Hillary's 16), who leads the field (by far) in raising money donated by people like me--why is this candidate "obviously" going to lose to Trump? The logic of this argument escapes me.
But this is what bias does: not even the facts make a difference. Sound familiar?
9
Of the nearly half-dozen "Bernie Can't Win" pieces published over the last week and a half, I actually think that this is one of the better ones. Still, it's foolish to say that he CAN'T win, especially just four years after the election of Donald Trump. Whatever weaknesses Sanders may have, he will, by virtue of partisanship, be a legitimate contender for the White House should he be the Democratic nominee. And I'd pause before saying that we'll "never" be a socialist country. The income tax was once considered to be a "threat to liberty" too.
6
Bernie has been using the following quote from Nelson Mandela in his stump speech: "It always seems impossible until it happens."
9
This is a disingenuous opinion. I thought Egan would know better. Sanders is talking Scandinavia not Cuba, and Egan is talking about Russia 2.0. It is okay to argue Sanders can't win but for the right reasons. This is a hit job.
8
Here's a book for Timothy Egan to read: "Viking Economics," by George Lakey. The subtitle: How the Scandinavians Got It Right -- and How We Can, Too.
6
Great article. A grumpy old Marxist is indeed the last thing Americans want. Just the thoought of it would cause the stock msarket to plunge. America has been extraordinarily successful as a capitalist democracy, It should defend both capitalism and democracy by nominating, and then electing, another Democratic nominee.
1
@Bruce Freed
God forbid, not the stock market! The horror! What will become of all my Lockheed and Berkshire Hathaway shares!
Meanwhile, for the rest of us....
https://www.cnbc.com/2018/01/18/few-americans-have-enough-savings-to-cover-a-1000-emergency.html
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/09/14/opinion/columnists/great-recession-economy-gdp.html
1
@James: I'd put any one of our moderate Democrats up against your prime minister Scott Morrison, who said in a speech two days ago that he will do little or nothing to improve climate change policies, despite the brushfires that burned out homes and towns, killed people, and devastated your wildlife and ecosystem.
1
Yes indeed--some folks who recall what happened when the Democrats nominated a presidential candidate too far ahead of the left curve of the nation in 1972 to run against another Republican running for re-election who also was widely disliked on the basis of his deceitful character--"Tricky" Dick Nixon. Nixon won 49 states. And some folks also paid attention to the trouncing of the Labor Party led by the hard left Jeremy Corbyn a few months ago.
3
That's what "moderate" Republicans said about Trump.
7
of course he cannot win..now he should back Biden for the good of the country try...extreme change can come later on..we need the STEADY PATH and right now! Bernie cannot pay for his ideas..medicines and medical devices need to come down in price
and then we can discuss socialized medicine..
1
Does the Chao family pay in Bitcoin?
3
What you’re missing here is that Bernie’s movement, love it or hate it, is a populist movement, like Trump’s, but on the left. It’s also generational to a large degree, and anti-establishment. The big mistake the Dems keep making is trying to capture the elusive white voter, most recently the ones that voted for Obama and went to Trump, with centrist candidates, and that is not the right strategy. I think Bernie could capture more Trump voters who voted for Obama than any centrist could hope for, and bring along the under 45 vote and Latinos, many of whom are Sanders supporters. Then who’s left? The moderate voters who can’t stand Bernie or his supporters because some of them didn’t vote for Hillary. But now, if the shoe is on the other foot and Bernie gets the nomination, would they put their vote where their mouth is?
209
@Christine Humphrey „The big mistake the Dems keep making is trying to capture the elusive white voter, most recently the ones that voted for Obama and went to Trump, with centrist candidates, and that is not the right strategy.“
That strategy has worked perfectly fine in the 2018 midterms. All districts that were flipped, were flipped by moderate democrats.
Progressive democrats on the other hand have not flipped a single district in that election and have not demonstrated that they are more competitive than moderates in purple districts.
28
@Christine Humphrey
but not Populist enough.
He's scary to too many voters. Perhaps more significantly, he represents East Coast culture fairly narrowly, in a way that does not play well to the center of the country. People on the coasts, including some NYT writers, are too myopic to notice such obvious problems.
16
@Christine Humphrey If Bernie is the nominee, I will vote third party, same as his followers did in 2016. One good turn deserves another.
6
If we think the country is divided now, just wait until Bernie Sanders is elected president. We need a (one-term) President Biden or Bloomberg to give America some breathing room to heal from the uber-partisanship that's been tearing us apart since Trump became president (with Russian help). As well, I and millions of Republican Never Trumpers will gladly vote for Biden or Bloomberg, but most of us will stay home or vote 3rd-party if Bernie is the nominee.
5
Mr. Egan ignorance of economics is exceeded only by his ignorance of history. Let's compare FDR's policies to Bernies. Here is what FDR wanted for the country:
"The right to a useful and remunerative job in the industries or shops or mines of the nation.
"The right to earn enough to provide adequate food and clothing and recreation.
"The right of every farmer to raise and sell his products at a return which will give him and his family a decent living.
"The right of every businessman, large and small, to trade in an atmosphere of freedom from unfair competition and domination by monopolies at home or abroad.
"The right of every family to a decent home.
"The right to adequate medical care and the opportunity to achieve and enjoy good health.
"The right to adequate protection from the economic fears of old age, sickness, accident, and unemployment.
"The right to a good education."
And he won 4 elections.
7
@Len Charlap,
Did FDR ever call himself a socialist? Symbols matter in politics. If Sanders called himself an FDR Democrat, I think he would get a lot less resistance.
My only hope to avoid a repeat of 2016 is that a lot of voters that voted for Trump last time around will either be dead or incapacited when November 2020 rolls around, replaced by younger, more diverse, and more progressive voters. Demographic shiftis inevitable it's not the same electorate it was 4 years ago.
1
Egan is right because of the Electoral College. Democrats can only win by doing okay between the two coasts and south of Minnesota. We should choose Biden, Klobuchar, or Bloomenthal.
3
Do none of the "Bernie Can't Win" pundits have any recollection that in virtually every one of the final polls leading up to the Democratic Convention in 2016, Sanders was outperforming Clinton in head-to-head matchups vs. Trump by anywhere from 3 to 12 points. News flash for those of you who believe that the socialist label is still a killer: the good old "markets will solve everything" consensus is in a tailspin and the window of "legitimate" political opinion is considerably wider than it has been in decades - thanks in part to Sanders, and much to the chagrin of the remnant that likes things just as they are.
6
The biggest issure with Bernie is that his supporters may not show up on Election Day if he doesn't win the nomination. His no compromise attitude drives a wedge through the Democratic Party electorate that will elect Trump is he's not the nominee. As far as I'm concerned, he might as well be working for Trump's campaign. I'll vote for him if he's the one running against the President but I'll also vote for any Democrat on the ballot.
4
@jonr More Sanders supporters showed up in 2016 for HRC than HRC supporters showed up in 2008 for Obama.
4
Nominating Bernie would cause millions of my fellow Republican Never Trumpers to stay home in November, or vote symbolically for third-party candidates. But we will happily put Joe Biden over the top if he's the Democratic nominee.
3
I support Bernie Sanders, but I have to say, because of Timothy Egan's past, general insightfulness, this article has me worried - a bit.
However, his argument is not as airtight as it would first seem.
He states: "Democrats lose with fire-and-brimstone fundamentalists. Three times, the party nominated William Jennings Bryan, the quirky progressive with great oratorical pipes, and three times they were trounced."
First of all, different candidates, different times. Jennings ran over one hundred years ago (in 1896, 1900, and 1908). While there are some similarities, such as the screwing of the (in Jennings terminology) "common man," the issues then are not the issues now. There was no concern for the deleterious effects of a for-profit healthcare system, no concern for the capitalistic destruction of the world environment and the resulting threat to the habitability of the planet. There was no gigantic student debt.
Women's issues were largely ignored. In fact, Jennings would have been more in line with Trump on such issues as abortion.
There is also one huge factor that makes Sanders' chances for success much greater than Jennings': Jennings didn't run against Donald Trump. Many, many people who at other times would have been reluctant to vote for Sanders, including such stalwart capitalists as Mike Bloomberg, have stated that they will vote for WHOEVER is the Democratic nominee for president, even if that nominee is Sanders.
3
Sanders can win. A little humility can go a long way.
5
Mr Egan says we just need Teddy Roosevelt style trust-busting and restructuring but Sanders can't beat Trump because America has never been Socialist. I got a good laugh out of it. Why?
Bernie plans a Franklin Delano Roosevelt style trust-busting and restructuring which was called the New Deal and gave us 70 years of prosperity. FDR reduced economic inequality with progressive taxation and empowered labor by making Unions legal and regulating the financial sector. Eight years after the last remaining New Deal bank regulation bill got dumped we had the Great Recession. Bernie is a Democratic Socialist like socialists running economies in Europe today, not a Marxist Socialist. They believe the People should own the Means of Production, which ends up with the government owning the means of production and running the economy (AKA Communism). As for Trump, Bernie outpolled him in 2016 every time. This year Bernie was cheered at a Fox Town Hall of all places. for his presentation on Medicare for All.
Sanders believes the Government has a duty to the American People and he cares about that - and they can tell. I read somewhere that Bernie didn't know anything about being mayor when he became Mayor of Burlington "but he attracted good people". Trump attracts predators.
6
All of the debates about who can beat Trump assume a few things that are not safe assumptions: we will even have an election, if we do it will be fair, no outside foreign government will hack the voting mechanisms or FB influence the election, or if Trump loses-he concedes and leaves office without declaring the election a fraud. Frankly, seeing the impeachment spectacle, which looks like a practice run for the Republicans on how to lie out of both sides of their mouths with straight expressions, the coming election is not a foregone conclusion. Apply the same lies in a different context to the election, and we will have a repeat of the farcical impeachment trial. Where is George Orwell when we need him again?
4
Another exceptional column from Mr. Egan, one whose premise — the unelectability of Senator Sanders — will meet be discounted by many. But, as a voter who worked hard for Sanders in 2015/6, I reluctantly agree. The election will be won or lost in the squishy middle, especially among those Republicans and including fallen-away Democrats, who would love a good reason not to vote for Trump a second time. A progressive candidate will be a bridge too far for many of them, perhaps enough to secure a second term for Trump. We need to be looking 2 or 3 election cycles ahead, but first secure the White House. Neither Warren nor Sanders, as much as I admire both, will be able to achieve that.
4
Like so many over-60 citizens, you fret about the person who has the greatest chance of stopping democracy's ongoing assault by this administration. Sanders is the candidate that inspires young voters, who are essential to winning. If Bernie hadn't been foiled by the DNC and Hilary, we would not even be at this horrific point in history. Please stop using your forum to promote another disastrous loss for the country.
6
Another plausible hypothesis is that a Sanders election run in 2016 would have gone down even harder than Clinton. Progressives have no grasp how toxic the socialist label plays in middle America. We may test that hypothesis in 2020.
3
@Michael Grossmann how would you know? The current poll numbers don't support your theory.
This infighting among (moderate) progressives at this point is not good. t and his cronies will smear any candidate from the other side, irrespective who. Bernie maybe cranky, this being part of his genuine and caring persona. But he can also be very funny, and a lot of younger people place their hope on him giving them a better future, whatever its label. Let us not destroy that hope through infights as expressed in this article. Finally, Benie's brand of Democratic Socialism functions very well in many other countries where the median standard of living is considerable higher than in the US and where income extremes are far less excessive.
5
No, he can't win, but we Republicans believe he would be an outstanding candidate for the Democratic Party!
1
Thank you Tim Egan, I completely agree. I can't get down far enough through the Bernie bros to find anyone who agrees with us. I have something for them though, do remember George McGovern, and how great he was. He lost in a landslide. Michael Dukakis lost by even more, I think he won only 14 electoral votes. Kennedy, Carter, Clinton, Obama were all moderates. What really matters, with the maw of climate change and the 6th extinction hanging over us, is winning with an environmentalist. The polsters say Biden has a much better chance than Sanders or Warren, in the critical swing states. That is why Egan is right.
David blogs at InconvenientNews.net
3
I notice so many of the "of course Bernie will win" comments are coming from, well, Brooklyn, Chicago, San Fransisco, Vermont.................all fine places which I like, but all safe Democratic areas.
6
A question for Egan -- of all the attacks he's anticipating, will any of them NOT be applied to other democratic candidates if they are the nominee? The Republican machine has already set up the argument that, no matter who the democrats nominate, he or she will implement a "radical agenda" or "socialism." Even if Joe Biden is our party's nominee, Fox News and the RNC will rush to associate him with AOC and the progressive left.
So why not nominate somebody who won't have to play defense on that issue, someone for whom those attacks will surely backfire?
Egan concedes that, even as one candidate out of many, Sanders has shifted the overton window on a number of issues. What he doesn't mention is that Sanders has done this all while remaining one of the most liked politicians nationwide. It would be a mistake to assume that Sanders' policy positions won't gain traction once he's the nominee because they HAVE gained traction, even despite constant resistance from the political establishment.
If Trump could win on a platform of building the wall, which polled horribly, then Sanders can win on a consistent, authentic platform of catching up to the rest of the developed world and guaranteeing everybody healthcare as a human right.
4
It is fascinating to watch how many liberals are attacking Bernie, when they see that he has a better than average chance of winning the nomination. I would rather Bernie lose than nominate another liberal such as Biden, Bloomberg, or Buttigieg. These people, like Obama and Clinton before him, are piecemeal reformers. Trump won in 2016, because Obama bailed out the Banks, who caused the crisis but not ordinary people who suffered from it.
People loved FDR, because of the enemies he made. Bernie's enemies are billionaires, Zionists, and liberals who think that all we need are minor adjustments in our polity and economy. Our problems require structural change: making a good education available to everyone, not just the children of the wealthy and the middle class; making health care available to all, not just those lucky enough to pay medicare premiums or have private health insurance; taking real action on climate change that will cost energy producers to pay billions in reconversion.
Bernie is the head of a social and political movement. It will live on and grow after he is gone.
7
Reading the piece by Mr. Egan and many of the comments about how we cannot nominate a socialist because then Trump will win again. You should look at this recency piece from Vox(https://www.vox.com/2020/1/31/21113780/bernie-sanders-socialism-electability-primaries). Socialism may not be the poison pill it was in the 1970's.
But more than that, Trump already "won" against a moderate, centrist, middle of the road politician in 2016. Why is nominating a socialist suddenly going to be solely responsible for why Trump is reelected?
It's not. Politicians who are self serving, flip-flop with the wind, and want to maintain the current horribly broken system are the reason Trump won in 2016 and if he wins again in 2020 it won't be because a Democratic Socialist won the nomination.
4
There is extremely strong empirical evidence that Sanders can’t win. A Gallup poll in 2019 asked voters if they would be willing to support for president a candidate with each of a number of characteristics - Female, Black, Jewish, Muslim, etc. Ranking at the very bottom of the list of 12, at 47%, was "A Socialist," - below Gay or lesbian, Muslim, An Athiest, etc.: https://news.gallup.com/poll/254120/less-half-vote-socialist-president.aspx
Although Sanders today likes to call himself a "democratic socialist," in the past, he has just used the word "socialist." https://www.politico.com/story/2015/07/14-things-bernie-sanders-has-said-about-socialism-120265:
"In a speech he gave in… 1989, he said: ‘In Vermont, everybody knows that I am a socialist and that many people in our movement…are socialists.,”
It takes no imagination, whatsoever, to envision the tens of thousands of ads on television and every other medium using this quote and others, and probably video, where Sanders self-identifies as a socialist. No doubt, Sanders' euphemistic “democratic socialist” will become “Democratic Socialist.” Nominating Sanders would be political suicide.
2
Tell voters in more moderate states how old Bernie wants them to use their increased taxes to supply health care to illegals, and you won't get one vote out of them. Not one. Trump will be hammering that home, every hour of every day. Nominate him, and say goodbye to our Democracy. That's how important it is to send him home once and for all.
Notice how Trump keeps tweeting things to support him? There's a reason for that. He knows he can easily beat him.
2
Like all elections, this one will be won or lost on memes and tropes, not policies. What label sticks with voters? What perception sticks? Which candidate succeeds in making the election a referendum on his opponent?
Most of us know that Sanders isn't a full-on socialist, but that will be Trump's line of attack. As soon as Trump runs an ad with videos or quotes from Sanders praising Fidel Castro and the Cuban Revolution, we've lost Florida.
There are videos of Sanders praising Nicaraguan dictator Manuel Ortega. He still praises Ecuadorian would-be strongman Eva Morales.
The videos and past speeches make it easy for Trump to make Bernie look like a Marxist because he supported Marxist regimes. We can argue until we're blue in the face about what a social democrat is, but those distinctions will be lost in a full-blown meme war.
Timothy, I mostly agree with what you say and like how you say it, but in this case I disagree vehemently. You need to read Paul Rosenberg's interview of Rachel Bitcofer in Salon (https://www.salon.com/2019/08/17/this-political-scientist-completely-nailed-the-2018-blue-wave-heres-her-2020-forecast/) so you can correct your understanding of the dynamics. In particular, you'll have a better understanding of why the Democrats flipped 40 House seats, and that understanding applies to the presidential race.
1
Timothy is correct.
He’s too old, too sick and shouts all the time. Harken back to Mondale and McGovern.
Americans are not socialists and understand that government spending needs to be paid for. He has no program or explanation for how to pay for all the free stuff and giveaways.
4
A very strange column indeed.
Socialism: You are the only one concerned about socialism; you apparently don't have the slightest clue as to what it is.
Confidence in the economy: you probably don't have any financial problems; but you are not the average working person with really bad wages that have been stagnant for 40 years. Millions will be in more pain by November; millions already are -- so wrong again.
Medicare for All (MFA): You of course miss the point; private insurance is the problem. Huge salaries, massive waste with all the varied payment plans and varied procedures, massive waste of money paid to investors and overhead and PROFIT! Bernie will explain this to them. When MFA arrives, people will know they just keep on seeing their regular doctors; just walk in, get treated and walk out. Pay nothing! Same doctor, pay nothing. Of course taxes go up but no premiums, copayments, coinsurance, deductibles! They make out better. It pays for itself because EVERYONE participates; a huge, massive pool of 300 million people! That's what makes any insurance work! The tax is less than all they currently pay in this horrid for profit system.
Fracking: wait until the real education about climate change arrives; wait until the fires and flooding and cost of food shoots up because of the coming climate disaster! The crises that causes will be soon accepted by everyone and the ignorant Trump denial swamp will be seen for what it is.
Not rigidity; but excellent foresight.
3
Bernie could win . . . if the only persons voting were NYT readers. Sadly, that is not the case and I don't want to allow myself to be convinced by the choir that he is a safe bet. Hopefully, by the time the convention rolls around, we will have determined the strongest national candidate, and then all of us will vote blue, no matter who!
1
"Sanders is a rigid man, and he projects grumpy old man rigidity, with his policy prescriptions frozen in failed Marxist pipe dreams. He’s unlikely to change."
Says a man who after citing all the obvious benefits this Mensch will bring to the United States badly in need of them.
Mr. Egan, I am not a fan of your Catholicism infused political analysis and preferences. Still you are decent man. I suggest that you tell what you are saying here to MILLIONS of people who are sending their lunch money to Bernie because they believe in his message.
You say: "failed Marxist pipe dreams,' when places like Sweden, Norway and Denmark have been implementing them for decades with huge success without ever thinking they are bringing Marxist dreams to reality. I worked with the highest echelons of those three countries as an advisor to their Central Banks and Ministries of Finance; I can tell you with 100 percent certainty that NONE of the people I dealt with would call themselves Marxist.
I will not insult you by saying you don't know what Marxism is or who Marx was (even though I doubt you have familiarity with them beyond rudimentary pages from standard texts). But Medicare for All, Free Public College to All, Gender Pay Equality, Clean Air and Water, 21st century infrastructure and massive election reform has more to do with John Rawls who wrote A Theory of Justice in 1971. I knew him, he was no Marxist!
7
I don't want Bernie to win because his supporters are insufferable. We don't need a political Messiah. We need a leader to start rebuilding after trauma!
3
"Sanders is a rigid man, and he projects grumpy old man rigidity, with his policy prescriptions frozen in failed Marxist pipe dreams. He’s unlikely to change."
Says a man who after citing all the obvious benefits this Mensch will bring to the United States badly in need of them.
Mr. Egan, I am not a fan of your Catholicism infused political analysis and preferences. Still you are decent man. I suggest that you tell what you are saying here to MILLIONS of people who are sending their lunch money to Bernie because they believe in his message.
You say: "failed Marxist pipe dreams,' when places like Sweden, Norway and Denmark have been implementing them for decades with huge success without ever thinking they are bringing Marxist dreams to reality. I worked with the highest echelons of those three countries as an advisor to their Central Banks and Ministries of Finance; I can tell you with 100 percent certainty that NONE of the people I dealt with would call themselves Marxist.
I will not insult you by saying you don't know what Marxism is or who Marx was (even though I doubt you have familiarity with them beyond rudimentary pages from standard texts). But Medicare for All, Free Public College to All, Gender Pay Equality, Clean Air and Water, 21st century infrastructure and massive election reform has more to do with John Rawls who wrote A Theory of Justice in 1971. I knew him, he was no Marxist!
Second attempt: 4:06 NYC
3
Thanks, Mr. Egan for yet another entry in the "Wealthy Man Opposes Wealth Tax" genre. You NYT columnists should pool your work and publish it as a book. It could make you all slightly richer!
Nitpicking every low priority, below-the-fold bit of a candidate's policy agenda is not constructive or informative. Suppose the Democratic party hews to the center as you suggest. Didn't we try that in 2016? Refresh my memory - how did that turn out?
Hasn't Biden already tried and failed to secure the nomination twice (going on three)? Shades of William Jennings Bryan indeed.
The "Center or Center-Right" model of the last thirty years has failed most Americans. It's time to give the center-left a try for real, for the first time.
7
If you think Sanders is out, then so is Warren.
And if those are you conclusions, then it appears it's Biden. Wow, more of the "same old, same old" I guess. Talk about letting the destructive status quo continue ad infinitum.
Which is NOT what this country needs. But I will admit that the population of this country is FAR dumber than we give credit for. "What's the Matter with Kansas" now applies to the whole country, or at least as far as the Electoral College is concerned. Duped into hanging our collective economic opportunities with our very own ropes!
Every deplorable has been duped into believing "You'll be rich one day, so be sure to vote for the *latest* tax cut!" Works every time!
And if you're in doubt, then shout a few slogans to get the undecideds in line, "Socialism! Abortion! Gun Control!"
Voila, you have your minions in line. Proceed as you wish.
3
@Bike Fanatic
Biden or Hillary would have never nominated Neil Gorsuch to the Supreme court in a gazillion years. And it didn't happen under Obama either.
Painting broad strokes as if "it's all just been same ole' same ole' under either party, either way" shows extreme naivete on what such policy and appointment changes really mean.
Unfortunately I hear that trope alot.
Usually you are worth a quick read, especially about the Northwest, but on this you are out of your waters. We do not need Teddy Roosevelt, but Franklin, and Bernie strikes me more as a New Deal Democrat than a Socialist. You seem to want to support his big change ideas, but are afraid you will be in a minority. That is, you are afraid. Buck up ole boy, the fight is real this time.
4
You know that quote "the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over again and expecting a different result"? Centrists are interested in maintaining the status quo and brought about Trump because people are sick and tired of the same thing over and over again. So sick, that many Dems voted for Trump or did not vote at all, just so Clinton wouldn't win! Rallying behind Bernie is just radical enough to beat Trump and probably the only chance. In fact even Bernie may not be enough.
5
I seriously question the sanity of anyone in America (who's not super wealthy or part of the ruling/political class) who does not love and support Bernie. How can anyone watch him speak and not see he's telling the truth, and fighting for THEM, unlike pretty much every other politician in America? Crazy times! Go Bernie Go!!!
5
The NYT reported that Trump won 2016 on the basis of 107,000 votes (0.09 percent of all votes cast) in 3 key states. Such margins are not predictable. While the correct forecast for 2016 was a Trump win, since that is what actually happened, the best forecast in advance would have been "too close to call."
It is the same today. The election, still, 9 months out, cannot be predicted. Any of the Democratic candidates will be in a close race against Trump. None are guaranteed either to win or lose. The campaign itself will probably be critical. The result will depend, as in 2016, on razor-thin margins in a few crucial states.
In 2016 the NYT asserted a 90%-plus probability of a Hillary win all through the summer and fall, up to the very last week and ended up with egg on its face. Have we learned anything from that?
Bloviating pundits like Egan who claim special knowledge of the future that in fact no one possesses are charlatans. Their forecasts are bunk.
5
Keep in mind that the founding fathers were extremists to the British lords.
4
Dear Tim, Please check your facts!
Did you attend or send your children to a public school, like the one I attended, and the one my daughter attends? That's a socialist program that even communist China doesn't provide it's citizens. Are you planning to cash your Social Security checks when you retire? That's a Socialist program that communist China doesn't provide its citizens. These Socialist programs, and the many others that USA citizens almost universally support, are exactly what MAKES AMERICA GREAT. America 200 years ago wasn't socialist, nor were we significant on the world stage. Socialism explains why America has the world's biggest economy, and China, which many many many more people, is still #2.
5
Can you name the largest, most powerful socialist institution in American society? The Pentagon. Let's hear again how Americans hate socialism.
Support the troops. With your tax dollars, America. Free enterprise? Not so much.
4
No he can't If he and his fans played their cards correctly they can have a powerful voice in creating the Democratic Platform. The goal of thsi election is to crush the GOP and to toss this most ignoble experiment ,Trumpism, into the trash can of History. We need to put our ego's aside, there is a bigger picture.
Another 4 years if Trump will produce courts that will happily block any progressive legislature passed. Do yo really want a Gorsuch/Kavanaugh court blocking a future green new deal or telling us what the right of a women are.
Trump is a moral abomination and a disgrace to the constitution we honor. Do you want courts empowered by the amoral abomination crushing progressive ideal for decades.
2020 has a single issue defeat Trump. Vote as if the nation's future depends in it. It does.
And so it begins, the demonization of Bernie Sanders.
You see a lot of "Bernie can't win . . ." articles (and comments) that all proclaim to have crystal clarity about what will occur in the future. But the reality far more complex and the level of uncertainty is much higher than Mr. Egan (and many commentators wish to admit).
This piece is sloppy journalism. Mr. Egan has staked out a position that, if it turns out to be how things unfold, makes him look great, insightful, prescient. If things break the other way and Sen. Sanders is elected, people will either forget what Egan has said in the past or he can deflect with a "who woulda thought" shrug. Weak tea from one the NYT's star columnists to mollify HIS fears. Egan would do far better to endorse the candidate of his choice and defend that decision, rather than claiming some special insight into the electoral process that "regular" citizens somehow do not have in the guise of warning us of our impending doom.
I support Senator Sanders in the same way I supported President Obama. I like both men because I do not think that they are corruptible. I feel the same way about Senator Warren; less so about the other candidates. I have serious policy disagreements with all three just mentioned, but I believe that they cannot be bought, that they believe in democracy and its promise (unfulfilled) of equality under the law and within the economy, above all else.
Integrity - write about that. It might decide the election
7
With friends like centrist Democrats, who needs enemies?
10
So, Mr Egan, assuming you are not successful in thwarting Sen Sanders nomination, which side will you be on in November
Are you and your fellow courtiers more afraid of Bernie‘s watered down “socialism”, than you are of DJT?
Which side are you really on?
6
Go Joe: "the finest vice president any President would wish for ...whose accomplishments are of a histor nature." President Obama "I love Joe Biden...Harry Reid. We are living through the most corrupt administration in American History (thanks John Bolton and NYTimes). Joe's goal is to clear up the government and bring in high caliber people to make it run properly. If he can accomplish that, we can move forward to some of the more aspirational plans being discussed in the Democratic Party
Opinion writers for the NYT have no stakes in politics beyond seeing it as their favorite TV show. Politics! Think about it, has anything gotten worse for them since Trump took office? No, not at all, unless you count the fact that Trump makes fun of them and most of the country agrees with him even if they hate everything else he does. I mean this entire article proves that this is true. This isn't political opinion writing, it's a TV recap.
The rest of us the stakes are very very high, life or death even. It's no longer a TV show.
3
Counterpoint: Bernie Sanders Will Win
6
Another pundit from the class who told us Trump cannot win prognosticates a Trump win over Sanders this time. Here's hoping your record will endure unsullied.
3
Whatever you think about his brand of socialism, Bernie Sanders is is our best hope to oust Trump. Pete and Amy would be crushed, period. Elizabeth can't draw a vote among the working class Midwest. Mike cant buy the Presidency. And Biden, he's clearly lost his edge (watch the last debate footage and read his Times interview, it's scary).
That leaves Bernie Sanders, who has the charisma, the people power, the money and the passion to win. Let's get behind him now for the future of America and the planet!
6
Carter could not be elected. Nor could Reagan, Bush 43, and, least of all, Trump. Sanders might not win. But the last 45 years prove that he can.
3
Bernie can get the nomination and can beat Trump. But the main obstacle to this achievement is not the voters. It is the American Ruling Class that will do everything in its power to stop a socialist from becoming President. And that is who people like Egan (and the NY Times) are speaking for, using the red herring of "unelectability". The closer he gets, the more intense the attacks will be from all sides. My hope is that those of us who want real change in this country will not be bullied into backing off, will fight back, and get Bernie elected.
6
Yeah, let's complain about the flaws of capitalism and do nothing to correct them. That's how Dems lost to Reps. IT took Bernie for Dems to accept that the public option is not so bad. Of course, it is late, they had the chance but blew it. Funny how the centrists dismissed 40% of Americans - you would think they will value every vote, but I guess they think they will win enough Trump's supporters by promising to go back to pre-Trump era. But even more interesting that Obamacare had exactly same level of support when it was discussed in the Congress, and even less of support when it was enacted. Dems always were cowards that's why we have Trump in the WH.
6
Sanders beats Trump by a greater margin than any other candidate except Biden, including in important swing states like Wisconsin and Pennsylvania. Those polls have been pretty steady for a while. If you're for Biden, be pro-Biden, give me a reason to support Biden. While you compare Sanders to William Jennings Bryan, a lot of us see Biden as a repeat of John Kerry or Hillary Clinton. Candidates win when they inspire, not when running with the campaign slogan, "Hey, at least I'm not the other guy." At least Bernie supporters actually like their candidate.
7
You might want to take a look at recent polling on a fracking ban in PA before calling it a "poison pill." According to a Franklin & Marshall poll released yesterday, Pennsylvania voters support a fracking ban 48% to 39%, with 32% strongly favoring one and only 18% strongly opposing. That's a political winner, not a poison pill. That's how you get those 32% to turn out at a higher rate, while turning off only a much smaller portion of the electorate.
The polling on almost all of Sanders's agenda is similarly popular, some of it much more so. Trump's agenda, not so much. The latest polling I found for the border wall was 60-40 against. If this election is fought on policy ground, Trump will be lucky to get 150 electoral votes. His policy agenda is toxic, and Sanders's is widely popular.
5
Amazing how as soon as anyone says anything critical of Bernie, the comments section immediately comes alive with numerous comments taking the opposite point of view.
I wonder who Trump really wants the Democratic nominee to be.
1
Two options for 2020.
1) Bernie Wins. We join the rest of the major democratic nations as a country with very obviously beneficial policies that treat our citizens as people instead of pawns for profit.
2) Bernie loses, but in losing drags the current iteration of the Democratic party into the dumpster. Moderates can join (or rejoin) the Republicans they claim to loathe in the "center", and those of us with vision and spine can reform into a true left party that cares for the interest of the working class, stands up to the corporate pawns wearing politicians' clothes on the right, and builds a platform to address the issues that gave us Trump.
The left that Bernie represents believes in creating change by engaging new people in the political process, and using those numbers to apply pressure to republican incumbents. "We the workers are your constituency, do as we want, or lose your job". That alone is more political acumen and "practicality" than anything I've heard from the debate stage or this rag of a paper. I would say it is basic math.
This carcass posing as a political party couldn't change the radio station. Why should we believe anything the Dems say?
Vote for Bernie. Defeat Trump by addressing the economic issues voters' face. Or keep believing that you can shout "no no you don't understand, we are the good guys!" thinking that changes the mind of anybody in this country living in the world moderates created and then handed, gift wrapped, to the far right.
8
You are dead wrong on No. 1.
Rhetoric is not sufficient to overthrow the fundamentals of society. Other Western Democracies have been built during the course of a century, do you imagine they would start revolutions to undo their order overnight?
Let’s say Bernie wins, do you really believe a blooming society would immediately replace the old one, with a fine government giving out freebies to everyone?
There is a case to be made for expanding our social welfare system in the manner of western Europe where capitalism thrives too. But Bernie is not the person to make that case. His boisterous, bombastic, arm waving,finger pointing manner represent his thought processes - all bluster and little substance. No to Bernie.
2
2018 was an off-year election. If off-year elections are to be the marker by which all elections are to be judged, what happened in 2010? Bernie Sanders wasn't on the ticket then, either.
And comparing Sanders to a 19th-century political figure is a bit of a stretch. For starters, Williams Jennings Bryan was a fire-and-brimstone religious extremist; Sanders is an atheist. The comparisons only get more exaggerated from there.
3
No Democrat will be able to win if everybody believes that their litmus test is the only legitimate one. We are all going to have to vote for a candidate with whom we disagree on something. Moreover, as we have seen several times already, it is not enough to appeal to a majority of Americans. It's all about specific populations.
Obama was able to put together a coalition to get him elected; unfortunately his coalition didn't hold for his agenda. In addition, Obama didn't fare especially well against the Republican party So I think different people have different takeaways from the example of Obama.
I will vote for any Democrat, any functioning adult, but I think choosing Biden would basically be an admission of defeat by the Democratic party. That an aging, out of office politician from a different era whose claim for the office is purely that he can beat Trump would be selected - given the plethora of qualified politicians who were running - would be a devastating commentary. He has so many deficits, not least of which is his son and his ethical lapses that Biden chose to overlook. Campaigning on his ability to work with Republicans will hamstring him much the way it did Obama. How will he be able to address politically polarizing but important issues like global warming? Or even taxing the wealthy for that matter. Not Biden. Please. Please. not Biden.
3
Mr. Sanders won't win because he's really bad at math; i.e., there's no reasonable way to fund his proposals. It's not rocket science.........
1
Hopefully, Timothy Egan is correct that Bernie Sanders cannot win the presidency. They said that President Trump would never win and look what happened. Of course, Mr. Sanders and President Trump are two very different people. Mr. Sanders is a socialist who wants to take from the rich and give to the poor free benefits. President Trump wants people to keep more of the money they earn by lowering their taxes. President Trump appeals to the average voters where Bernie Sanders appeals to those who want something for nothing. There are more voters who support the policies of our president and why he will be re-elected.
Anybody thinking about voting for Bernie Sanders, please watch Frontline's America's Great Divide. This documentary is made up of interviews of leading social analysts, including Robert Reich, David Axelrod, Ben Rhodes, Steve Schmidt, Frank Luntz, Steve Bannon, and others. Their dialog very much addresses the power of radical social media and incitement politics impacts social and voting behavior.
What struck me is that these experts are struggling for answers to social media and incitement politics, often expressing their concerns in terms of fear and horror (Frank Luntz was in tears).
For me, if we want to overcome the radicalism in politics, media, and social networks, it will be a matter of focused hard work and truthful, strong leadership to drive positive social change - with an emphasis on reaching everyone. It is a matter of putting people first - right, left and center. I have real concerns that Sanders can reach across the country, especially after seeing this documentary.
Just no. Milquetoast Democrats, always arguing that center-right politics are just fine for America, have NO ANSWERS for the runaway income inequality in America, and have NO ANSWERS for existential climate change. Let's just go back to the policies of Obama, they say, which was more military spending, more tax breaks for the wealthy, and more unabated lobbying in D.C.
5
I wish I had a dime for every time I read an opinion piece in the Times (and elsewhere) that stated “Trump can’t win.” The upside, as with the recent attack from Hillary, is that each one of these editorials seems to result in a surge in support for Bernie.
303
@Robert
Every single word Hillary said about Sanders was absolutely true. That sexism is still the default response of so many men and all-too-many women doesn't make what she's said untrue.
Sanders has spent his career looking down his nose at Democrats, repeatedly accusing them of being no different that Republicans. While they've been a tad more centrist than I'd like, they've never been the same as Republicans. Dems in Congress know that with Sanders, it's his way or the highway. He's always been like that which is why he never gotten anything done. They don't want to have to work with another president who doesn't respect them as a co-equal part of government who represent a multitude of Americans, including Democrats, who don't want his policies enacted because he has never thought them through or considered the impact on real people.
Hillary was 100% right and a lot of Democrats just won't vote for him, no matter how bad trump is. Like the supporters who believed Sanders when he demonized Hillary, they'll vote for someone else or stay home. Althoug, unlike Sanders' supporters, they won't vote for trump.
17
@Marlowe
I will vote for him with great pleasure. As I will vote for anyone nominated by the Democrats. Any Democrat who will not vote for Sanders, or any of the other candidates regardless of which one wins, should turn in their Party card and think long and hard about what they really want to be when they grow up.
45
@Robert Amen. Corporate media at work.
14
If you're jumping off point is that Bernie is actually a Socialist then you're making a critical error.
It's true Bernie refers to himself as a Socialist, but the policies he's talking about are more in line with New Deal Democrats than Socialists. We're not talking about the government seizing and operating industry, we're talking about increasing taxes and expanding social programs. Even Medicare for All turns the government into a payer of private medical expenses, not an operator of medical facilities. Price controls and regulations, yes, but these are the tools of many Capitalist countries.
Seeing as Mr. Egan wrote a book on the The Dust Bowl which took place during the FDR administration, it's hard to believe he doesn't know that.
5
The bottom line is this: All these people getting their hackles up any time some one is critical of Sanders, justified or not, need to know that even though he is not my first choice I will enthusiastically vote for him if he wins the nomination, so the Sanders supporters had better make the promise to vote for any democrat that gets nominated and not run off and pout if Sanders is not the one.
Nothing is more important than getting Trump out of office. Nothing.
4
Do you really think Trump and the GOP won’t rip the bark off of Biden?
An honest take on all of this would admit that there are huge risks giving either Sander or Biden the nomination. The real question is: what do you want to offer people, real change, or the illusion that they can go back to 2015?
2015 is not coming back folks.
3
@Mary
I want to offer people a way forward and hope in a post-Trump world, it matters little who gets us there as long as we get there. The alternative is grim.
I live in Iowa and I plan to caucus for Mayor Pete on Monday night--based on his policy positions. Separately, I don't believe that he can win the nomination. Bernie Sanders is the Democrat with the passion of young voters behind him; he's authentic, honest and consistent; and even though I firmly believe that all change is incremental, the antidote to Trump is not centrism, it's a movement fueled by the urgency needed to combat climate change, class inequality, racial injustice, and other signs that our entire Democracy is teetering on the edge of destruction.
4
Bernie has never really faced publicized oppo research before, because Hillary didn't use it against him. You think the Republicans won't? They will. Also, Bernie's track record shows that he does nothing for down-ballot Democratic candidates. If he's the nominee, Trump will be reelected.
9
Simply put, the electoral process is not necessarily about winning. In choosing a candidate my vote is often put in the context of 'who do you want to lose with'?
I suspect that Sanders would lose. But the more important point would be that he would be unable to govern. His presence at the top of the ticket would hurt Senate and House candidates in swing districts, thus ensuring a Republican Senate and a smaller Democratic House majority.
For those whose frame of reference is a safe Democratic district (or state), this may seem unlikely. If you know lots of people who would turn out enthusiastically for Bernie, you may be inclined to assume that would be the case in purple states & swing districts.
But take a look at the 41 new House Democrats who in 2018 flipped competitive seats previously held by Republicans. None of them ran on a Sanders-type platform. They were more like Amy Klobuchar (who is pretty progressive by the way, but knows what scares off moderates).
These new House Democrats are why Nancy Pelosi is Speaker, why Trump could be impeached, and why GOP legislative priorities have been blocked since the 2019 congress was sworn in.
I'm not talking AOC & "the squad". I think they're OK, but they didn't flip any GOP-held seats.
Sanders would win over some new voters, yes, but he would lose many of the suburban moderates who voted Democratic in 2016 and 2018.
6
According to Mr. Wiki, Egan writes "from a liberal perspective." Yeah? Okay, everybody sing along:
""I vote for the democratic party
They want the U.N. to be strong
I attend all the Pete Seeger concerts
He sure gets me singing those songs
And I'll send all the money you ask for
But don't ask me to come on along
So love me, love me
Love me, I'm a liberal
Sure once I was young and impulsive
I wore every conceivable pin
Even went to the socialist meetings
Learned all the old union hymns
Ah, but I've grown older and wiser
And that's why I'm turning you in
So love me, love me
Love me, I'm a liberal"
1
Another 'Anybody but Bernie' column from the New York Times about how he is unelectable despite every poll showing that he handily beats Trump in every Swing State.
Interesting how there is no mention of the fact that we already have the most oppressive kind of socialism for the Wealthy.
Tax breaks, subsidies and government support seem just fine for large corporation but we only hear cries of 'Socialism' when we talk about the government helping ordinary people.
Meanwhile the New York Times and 'Centrists' oppose any rational steps to address inequality, appalling healthcare and climate change.
Upholding the Staus Quo as our country disintegrates, our people suffer and American's standard of living plummets is what the New York Times pushes as 'realism'.
The New York Times, and its obsession with retaining the satus quo has become a huge part of the problem.
13
@JMC I couldn't love your comments more! Well said! Let's just hope this time around people will finally see.
6
Amen, JMC. As a lifelong reader of the NYT, I have never seen this: they are running a series of anti-Sanders pieces and seems terrified of the prospect of his candidacy.
5
Needless to say, we were told by all the wise persons that Trump "couldn't win" at this point in 2016, too. I won $100 from my wife by betting on the day he announced that he was a shoe-in to win the Republican nomination. My money now would be on Sanders' victory next fall. In both cases, the bet depends on actually paying attention to base attitudes and values. There's a reason Sanders has beaten Trump in national polls for months now. Neither Egan, nor the rest of the corporate MSM, ever mentions the crucial, known fact that Sanders beat Trump handily in the Rust Belt exit polls in 2016. Trump won the region as a clear second-best to Sanders for the legitimately furious workers of the region, and he only won because he and his advisors shrewdly did all he could to play Sanders in his reality show campaign by pretending to be fighting for the mob against their "elite" billionaire oppressors. There's a reason so many unions are coming out now for Sanders. The Rust Belt manufacturers and their workers have not fared well under Trump. Sanders is a much stronger candidate for the Rust Belt than Biden, as we'll see if Biden is still around for the Rust Belt primaries and Sanders finishes him off. Finally, the Millennials are now fully 30% of eligible voters, whereas those over 65 are only 15%. Let that sink in for a while. Go Bernie.
6
Not a huge Bernie fan--Warren is smarter--but ironically, he might be our only hope for beating trump. In 2016, we ran a centrist, elderly, establishment Dem with a lot of baggage. How'd that turn out? And speaking of turn-out, these pundits also seem to forget that trump is now POTUS because about 100 thousand disgruntled 'socialists' in Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin instead voted for Stein, and even more simply stayed home. To win the battleground states, our best shot is Bernie. Biden is polling at 6 percent--SIX--among people under 40. Like Obama said, when you do the same thing over and over again and it doesn't work--time for a change.
4
@Cyntha I'll vote for whoever is the Democratic nominee, Sanders included, but here's the problem: yes, he would win back those errant Jill Stein voters, but he would lose lots of suburban moderates who did vote for Clinton.
1
To say that "the United States has never been a socialist country" is a breathtaking display of ignorance. Socialism was burned into the constitution when it explicitly authorized the establishment of "post offices and post roads". Now we have an interstate highway system, a national aeronautics and space administration, a multitude of regulatory agencies to maintain safety and a minimal standard of well being. We have Social Security and Medicare and Medicaid, and on and on and on. Bernie Sanders brand of socialism merely seeks to bring us up to speed with most other countries in the developed world, including Scandinavia, or the UK, or even our neighbor to the north, Canada. And it's not about "class loathing". It's about the wealthy and corporations paying their fair share. Why should and individual making $40,000 pay 22% in federal taxes and Amazon pays nothing?
This article reads like a list of absurd tropes that have been thrown at Sanders since day one. I'm looking forward to him standing up to the liar-in-chief who sits in the Whitehouse, and watching Sanders tear him to shreds. Given the general state of denial that approximately half of our countryman seem to be living under, what happens in the end may or may not be affected by any rational debate, but Bernie Sanders stands at least as good a chance as any of the Democratic rivals.
4
As a Republican who will not vote for Trump or any of his Congressional enablers, I urge Democrats to not nominate Sanders. Yes, if nominated, I will vote for him as a lesser of two evils, but many Independents and Republicans I know who do not want Trump will not do the same. Many will not vote at all or write in someone. Sanders will turn off swing voters. Egan is correct in that Sanders cannot win a general election.
He is Trump's dream opponent, which should say something. And has he had a new idea in the last 40 years?
3
Sanders has real baggage that will give folks reason to focus on him and less on Trump.
Bernie's first problem is his wife Jane and her tenure as president of Burlington College, which went bust over a dubious real estate scheme that drew the attention of federal investigators. Her "golden parachute" -- after she allegedly cooked up the real estate scheme that bankrupted the college -- was questioned at the time and remains contentious.
Think any effort by Sanders to zero in on Trump's corruption won't be turned around on questions of his wife's dubious financial schemes that accelerated Burlington College's demise?
Count on Trump driving a Mac truck through Jane's troubles at Burlington College. There's also the question of nepotism: hard to raise in-law issues with Trump when your wife was your chief of staff.
Bernie's second problem is that for all those years on the federal payroll, representing Vermont's 600,000 mostly white citizens, he's got next to zip to show for it. Yes, he's gotten legislation through the Senate, which named two post offices after Vermonters but otherwise his best known accomplishment was exempting gun manufacturers from financial liability.
Then there's his new lakeside Summer home, purchased after 2016, one of three homes owned by a socialist who has to answer the question why property is theft.
None of these should be deal-breakers but add that to the latent hostility (towards an angry old guy) and Trump makes Sanders the issue.
8
Speaking as someone who disagrees with Bernie Sanders on a number of issues...
Call it the cynic in me, but if Bernie does win the nomination, I can guarantee you Tim Egan will continue writing columns about how he can't beat Trump, perhaps even entertaining the prospect of some third-party bid mounted by the dyspeptic billionaire du jour. Hey, it's not like Howard Schultz is our only one here in Seattle. I'm sure we'll be hearing much the same prognosticating from Hillary Clinton too.
Also, this morning I read someone predicting that, if Bernie gets elected, the first thing he'll do is raise corporate tax rates, thus killing jobs. Apparently the person making that prediction doesn't understand how laws get passed here in the USA.
5
Sad but true. The income disparity grows and grows yet each person subtly believes, this is just the way of the world. I’ll settle for the slim chance that if I work hard and play by the rules, things will improve without the disruption of capitalism as we know it. No they won’t. Fear is what the GOP sells and it works. The harsh life of poverty gets more challenging every day. Ask the thousands of homeless people in San Francisco, one of richest cities in the world.
5
I'm watching the primaries; Bernie isn't my top pick (or close). However, if he's the eventual nominee, I will vote for him, and I'll be angry that this column exists because the right will use it in their favor.
At this stage of the race, there are several viable candidates, some of whom I love and some of whom I don't. I'm watching all of them carefully, but in the end, I just want the candidate that can beat Trump and I'm not going to slam anybody who has that potential.
4
The DNC is doing it again. Changing the rules so Bloomberg can be in the next debate.
I can think of no better reason to vote Bernie.
13
I am afraid democrats are going to loose for the same reason they believe they are going to win. Sanders will win the primaries as it is the best representative of the most vociferous wing of the democratic party that is highly energized by him. However, in a general election they will loose all the independent votes and many democrats that are not that excited about a new revolution, even one going in the opposite direction to the one currently going on.
4
I have been consistently making the same comment to friends and associates that no presidential candidate self-identifying as socialist will ever prevail in a national election, as the general electorate will ultimately never stand for it. In spite of bi-coastal insistence to the contrary, average Americans in all regions of the country still distrust and reject the socialist label and it's policies.
I've not surprisingly been dismissed as a right-wing shill (I'm not). But I do now feel somewhat vindicated that this notion is now being espoused in the NYT editorial pages. Nominating Sanders would effectively hand this election to Trump, and this reality is now becoming even more apparent to the progressive leadership...
7
@Liam
I hear you :-(. I am afraid that we are heading to 4 more years of a freshly acquitted Trump ready to appoint 1 or 2 more judges to the supreme court.
1
The fact of the matter is this year's election has to be entirely about beating trump. In an ideal world I'd love to see a Warren or Sanders presidency as I do think the only way to fix most of what is broken requires a real paradigm shift. However, the worst case scenario is another four years of Trump. The only way to beat Trump is to appeal to those in the middle, and unfortunately that is not something Bernie can do.
5
Bravo! Great column, From William Jennings Bryan to George McGovern, the American public has shown that they are allergic to this kind of top down populism. Assuming the economy will stay as it is, Donald Trump is almost certainly going to be reelected. But senate and house control are not a forgone conclusion. If Donald Trump leads in a landslide, it could threaten those seats and any hope of blocking Donald at all.
5
Haven't we learned that "Trump did it too" is not an effective rebuttal against him and carries no weight with his worshipful base? Also, can we get off with the sudden fascination with the fact that Sanders, somewhat perversely, continues to refer to himself (at times) as a socialist or, more often, a Democratic socialist? What does that even mean any more--that he's a communist or a subversive, as some writers and politicians pretend to think? Hardly. Oo, what if America became a socialist country? Well, guess what--it is one.
1
The writer seems to have missed the fact that during the early days of that last election rump supporters and Bernie supporters often were at the same rallies such as the one at Carrier. When expressed not as socialism, but instead as "unrigging the system", its amazing how popular "socialism" is.
3
'Class loathing feels so good' is a novel concept to this unclassed reader and voter. There are good people to be found in every milieu, and it is enough to make this American smile in hindsight, once labeled a 'Socialist' by her parent for playing with the janitor's children.
A friend and Republican neighbor, Potter, enjoys going on about he is 'The Elite', cackling away in puerile mode, while asking if he should wear a top-hat when dropping this passenger off to visit her sibling. The sibling is an academic genius, happiest when studying artifacts in the desert, and reminiscent of Senator Sanders on a cloudy day.
To get to Friday, neither Potter, a working-class man, nor my sibling or this commentator are likely to cast our vote for Bernie Sanders.
There is a difference. Potter will vote Republican regardless of 'The Liberal' nominee, while my sibling and I will vote for the above, as a matter of principle.
It is my belief that some Americans in the greater majority are not able to connect with Mr. Sanders, a great mentor who appears ahead of his time.
Disappointment will take place if we are foolish enough to elect Trump to a second term, an unprecedented president, coddled and pampered by his senators. He is not exactly a class-act, and some of the populace is weary of being kept on alert by his explosive chest-thumping.
Orwell, a democratic socialist, showed little interest in American politics, but he left the following words for All: 'Be Afraid'.
Well there you go. As it turns out politicizing racism and sexism is a working political strategy in America whereas politicizing the many failures of market capitalism is not.
Let's hope for everyone's sake, you're wrong Mr. Egan.
6
The Dems need to turn some combination of PA, Ohio, Indiana, Wisconsin, North Carolina, Kentucky and Florida. Bernie Sanders will lose those states worse than Clinton. For the progressives who say they won't vote for a moderate Democrat, I don't believe you. Stay home and you get Trump.
6
@David For the centrists who say they won't vote for Sanders, I don't believe you. Stay home and you get Trump.
3
@David
Their idealism is worth more to them.
Besides many are white, straight and middle class and therefore (falsely) think they don't have much to loose if things stay the same - as Democracy is literally in flames on the Senate floor today.
Most think anything good or bad happening in politics is just a bunch of stuff done by a group of "all equally bad guys" if it doesn't involve Bernie.
1
Looking at the past twenty years, three bland centrist Democrats (Gore, Kerry, Clinton) lost. The Democrat who won two elections was the one who promised meaningful change and cause for hope.
5
@Rob Don't forget that Obama ran as a centrist. He may have been bland, too, but I'll take him over Sanders any day.
6
Bernie and his followers failed to rally behind Hillary. For that (and other reasons, sure) we got Donny Cornflake. Face it, Bernie is the 2016/2020 version of Ralph Nader (George W. sends his thanks), who delivered Florida to Bush in 2000. Look, I’m a progressive. But Sanders is indeed in the midst of a pipe dream if he thinks he can win. And so are his followers. So, you choose: your second or third choice, or the end of the country?
7
All the Bernie supporters come out to tell us we're wrong. So much about democracy ended today as the craven Republican Cult brought us to the New American Dictatorship that I really hope now that Sanders is the nominee. A 48 State blowout for Trump will seal the deal, forever. Good luck, America. It was a nice try.
Please don’t despair! We still have a chance to build a survivable, sustainable, just and civilized future. Join us. It’s not too late to increase democracy.
2
Tim, buddy, you can't see the forest through the tweets.
It's not Bernie that your boss, your pals, your kids need to be afraid of. You're all gonna be alright. Might not get that Martha's Vineyard vacation next summer, but I'm sure you'll still be in a Tesla.
No, Tim. It's not what happens to you if Bernie is President that you have to worry about. It's what happens to the oligarchs if he doesn't get elected.
5
@Josh
"It's what happens to the oligarchs if he doesn't get elected."
And what exactly would that be?
It's simple, I agree that Bernie Sanders will not beat Trump in November...
From my perspective I honestly believe the dark horse in the race is Michael Bloomberg...
Convince me otherwise...
6
Hilarious that the author attempts to link FDR and Obama, when in truth FDR was much closer ideologically to Warren or Sanders. Note his radical 1936 acceptance speech and compare to Obama's mild pleas for bipartisanship.
9
Bernie would have a running mate.
That factor could completely change the picture.
Bernie, teamed with just about any of the other candidates could make a powerful team.
Also, people will be able to take into account the replacement of this frighteningly corrupt and lawless Administration as another great benefit.
6
"He has authenticity. He certainly has consistency"
This is to put it mildly, false. You can review his votes and statements on guns and the second amendment. Bernie used to be a big NRA supporter who voted against the Brady bill. Turns out Bernie is as a big a flip-flopper as any politician.
3
When you examine the entire constellation of Democrat candidates, there isn't a single animating call to arms that will erode Trump voters who so surprisingly rebelled against the cultural/economic yoke that liberals so successfully installed over the last 30 years. Until the Dems understand that watershed event at an organizational level, they will continue to promote candidates that promise more of their cultural pogrom that a great many in our country reject. A pro-life Democratic candidate anyone?
1
My loathing is reserved for the Bernie Bros who torpedoed Hillary and who will refuse to work or vote for centrist candidate. Like Bernie the independent, they care more about their own moral illusions than their neighbors or country.
4
He’s McGovern. It’ll be an electoral college landslide.
4
It has nothing to do with class loathing; it has everything to do with making American Society better - alleviating problems and making it easier to live in.
4
Who paid you off, Mr. Egan? Bernie has energized whole new voting blocks. He would have beaten Trump had the Democratic establishment not sabotaged him in 2016. What do you see happening? Old Joe beating Trump? A brokered convention with (God forbid) Hillary running again? You’ve been spending too much time hanging with the Wall Street crowd.
7
I hereby add my common sense to that of Timothy Egan.
Joe Biden can't win.
Elizabeth Warren can't win.
We might as well cancel the Democratic Primaries and the Democratic Convention and just ask people to write in Trump instead of voting for any Democrat at all.
Because, face reality: none of them can win.
So none of them should try.
P.S. I am a Democrat. I am HELPING YOU. GIVE UP NOW!
It blows my mind how many people are wanting to nominate basically Hillary all over again. Bernie would have beaten Trump in 2016 and he will in 2020. The worst thing you can do is throw an establishment Dem up against Trump. Bernie is the only way forward. I like warren better but Bernie has a much better chance to beat him than she does.
4
I recognize that this is apparently the time to write alarmed articles about how flawed Sanders is, everyone is doing it.
But if you're going to crib an article from The Atlantic, you could at least go to the trouble of changing the title.
This is a lazier and more distorted version of Frum's article of the same name published 4 days prior. I don't agree with Frum either, but he at least tries to highlight the things Sanders is doing that other candidates must adopt in order to impassion their voters.
Frum also won't insult your intelligence by implying you don't know who William Jennings Bryan is while simultaneously forgetting about the failures of following the Gore, Kerry, and Hillary Clinton path.
7
Although this election surely will be fueled largely by emotions, there are a substantial number of Americans who have not lost the ability to think and reason. Yes, the "Base," won't waver from Tr*mp. The "Bernie Bros.," along with the vast majority of young people, will passionately support Sanders. Lifelong Democrats will vote for Sanders. Those who remember FDR and what he did for the majority of Americans will not be bothered one wit by the "Democratic Socialist" label. That leaves the "independents," centrist Republicans, and "people of color." Thinking people in all three groups can be swayed by cogent arguments for helping the "99%," (themselves) and by facts. The third group will overwhelmingly vote for anyone other than racist Tr*mp. It's going to be an ugly, ugly campaign, for certain. But, counting Sanders out is more wishful thinking by the Right, than reality. He would have beaten Tr*mp handily in 2016, were it not for the chicanery of the DNC. One large difference between 2016 and 2020, is that we all have now witnessed the ignorance, amorality, nastiness, and incompetence of Tr*mp, and the pure evil of congressional Republicans in their unswerving fealty to him. There will be a reckoning.
4
Remember Nixon-McGovern. Didn't work out so well, did it?
1
@RS no I don’t remember as I don’t live in a retirement home.
I think our country might have changed a little over the last 50 years.
2016, now that I remember.
1
Class loathing isn't an identity that one chooses. The pervasive labor movement building in this country that continues to grow, is composed of workers necessity to survive in a hostile culture that loathes the poor. Working class people have been ignored by the DNC and the RNC for the entire 40 years I've been on this planet. The blowback came when the voters rejected the neoliberal establishment nominee and favored the faux populist with authoritarian and fascist tendencies in 2016. Based on the polls, and Bernie's massive appeal to the 100 million voters that didn't vote because they despise DC, the Sanders campaign is our best shot at beating Trump.
7
"Class loathing"? Huh? All Bernie wants is to level the playing field. If there is any "class loathing" going on, it's coming from the top and directed at those in the middle and the bottom.
7
You support public schools? You support your local police and fire department? Do you appreciate the interstate highway system (especially 40 years ago when it was reasonably maintained) Were Grandma and Grandpa greatful for social security and later medicare and were you happy for them? I'm sure the answer to all is yes. Oh you evil socialist, you!
We have a mixed economy, part capitalist part socialist (supported by society for the good of all). The mix has been sliding since 1981. Bernie wants to stop the slide, add a payment system for healthcare, pay for PUBLIC college tuition and rebuild our infrastructure. He does not want to nationalize the healthcare system - doctors would work for themselves, hospitals would remain private. He is not talking about taking over production. He has been careful to say he is a democratic socialist.
Republicans will viciously attack whoever the democrats put up. Bernie has people on his side who are excited and are willing to go to bat for him.
8
It is worth noting that, in the light of the corrupt, dictatorial, deceitful way that Mr. Trump has conducted himself over the past three years, ANY democratic candidate should defeat our irrational, pathological liar of a president.
Run the unknown Democratic mayor of a small town in Massachusetts or Oregon against Trump. Tens of millions of voters will vote for him/her. Trump and his unethical administration is a train wreck.
The above idea will gain power, a great deal of power, if the Reublican senators decide to allow no witnesses to testify at the current impeachment trial, and then quickly acquit the president.
3
The rigged system is back:
The media wants to take down Sanders.
And now the DNC is back with it's nefarious 2016 tactics:
"D.N.C. Rules Change for Nevada Debate May Enable Bloomberg to Participate"
This is an attempt to again thwart the will of the people....brought to you by the mainstream media and the DNC.
7
@John - Its not surprising anymore that Trump and Sanders supporters have basically the same view of the media......as the enemy....
1
I find it most encouraging that so many readers disagree so vehemently with the message of this column. Whose side is Mr. Egan on, anyway?
5
"The next month presents the last chance for serious scrutiny of Sanders, who is leading in both Iowa and New Hampshire. After that, Republicans will rip the bark off him....what will get the Trump demagogue factory working...is the central message of the Sanders campaign: that the United States needs a political revolution....socialism."
What a joke:
1) Mainstream news liberals like Egan have already joined in a united front to debunk Sanders on the grounds of his supposedly extremist - but, in reality, hugely popular - political program: under cover of 'warning' voters of what the right will do, Egan is, in truth, joined at the hip with the right.
2) Anachronistic red baiting attacks on Sanders will only have traction with the hard right that will vote for Trump anyway.
3) Guess what - it's not working: Sanders is not only surging generally, but is now going up w/older voters, while Biden is slipping with them, his core age demographic:
[https://theintercept.com/2020/01/28/joe-biden-older-voters-bernie-sanders/]
4) In the name of that Democratic Party "unity" that Democrats have long called for its progressive near-half to follow, the Democratic establishment will have to either bow to popular will, or run Biden and lose:
[https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/jan/04/joe-biden-electable-trump-2020-election]
7
I read a lot and consume a lot of news. I read this and it sounds like Egan is just repeating republican talking points and hasn’t bothered to research Sanders policies. I’ve been listening to Sanders interviews and such for over 15 years, and it appears that Egan hasn’t.
Let me tell you who has been listening, young people. Young people who don’t read this column. The funny thing about young people is they more you tell them “no” the more they will disagree with you.
7
The one clear thread that connects all regular New York Times pundits (perhaps there's one exception) is an expressed aversion to Bernie Sanders.
What to conclude?
1) That there is an anti-Bernie virus that has infected the computers of New York Times columnists, one that becomes exponentially more virulent the closer we get to voting,
OR
2) It's a requirement for keeping their jobs.
7
Thanks Mr. Egan. This centrist Democrat won’t vote for Sanders. I lived next door to the socialists of Europe growing up. I want no part of what they promised and couldn’t deliver. They needed barbed wire and machine guns to keep their people from leaving until even that stopped working. Give me a centrist that can reach across the aisle and I’m all in.
2
Egan’s individual points regarding Bernie, agreed will not sink his election. But all of them coupled with the fact that Bernie will not attract the majority moderates or independents because of his socialist views will sink him. The 78 year old, “ never a democrat” , life time politician, with a mediocre record (yes he voted against the Iraq along side other democrats and republicans) is exactly the candidate that trump needs for re-election.
3
I’d like to see Sanders or Warren (or Biden or Klobuchar) take an issue like Social Security contributions and benefits and repetitively explore it in real depth in their campaign.
There’s a cap on contributions - anything earned in a year over a certain amount (in the low six figures) is exempt from the payroll tax. Propose eliminating that cap. Use math to show the extent to which that will help social security finances. Note that social security benefits are quite progressive, designed to replace most of a person’s income up to a certain level but progressively less after that. The better off you are, the more you can and should save for your own retirement.
But emphasize that you’re not going to cap benefits for upper middle class and wealthy people who would now be paying more, perhaps much more, into the system. Because fairness.
Apply notions of fairness to other policy proposals in the campaign, explaining clearly how many American fortunes are made possible by government research, using the power of eminent domain, military spending, infrastructure spending, and the rule of law.
If the aim really is a Scandinavian style market economy with capitalism and a healthy well-designed safety net then you’ll have to clearly make the case and also show you’re seriously interested in fairness for everyone, even the rich.
3
I live in Vermont and have campaigned for Bernie and voted for him in every election he has run in except President. I agree with the Mr. Egan, Bernie is too extreme for most of the country and I don't think we will get any of his ideas passed congress, also he will be torn apart by Trump.
3
For all of you who are so enthralled with what Bernie is selling you really need to get a reality check. You have to decide what your one goal is - getting Trump out of office or sticking to your democratic socialist guns and put Bernie up there who, if he were to win the Dem nomination I guarantee it will be by the narrowest of margins and a good chunk of those who did not want Bernie in are going to be more comfortable with the policies from the right than those from the extreme left. They will look past Trump as an individual and vote for the platform they are more comfortable with.
And it is not Bernie's.
3
Damning by faint praise, Timothy, is not working. Sanders is NOT A MARXIST. He supports a Capitalist Base in a MIXED ECONOMY like Scandinavia and mainland Europe. That entails reinstating and strengthening Anti-Trust and Glass-Steagall regulation, closing Tax Loopholes for Corporations and the wealthiest individuals in America to move profits offshore, park their untaxed wealth in Tax Havens or use it to buy back Shares rather than investing it plants and jobs in the U.S. Combine that with Deficit Financing of un-justified wars, bailouts for Wall St and Federal Subsidies for the same Corporations that move profits offshore and you have 2008 on endless repeat.
M4All covers everyone so that employers SAVE MONEY ON MEDICAL COVER FOR EMPLOYEES and costs Americans @50% less than they pay now in Premiums/Co-pay/Deductibles.
Insurance industry employees will not be abandoned; Sanders built in re-training costs in the 4 year transition to M4All and adds millions of new jobs in a Green Economy. FDR and Henry Wallace were called "Reds" by Conservatives of both Parties but the U.S. enjoyed its most prosperous period with the New Deal programs in force from the '30s until 1981 when Reagan set about breaking Unions, destroying Savings and Loans, and encouraging mega-mergers, hostile take-overs, and using Soc Sec for fund his "tax cuts". Reagan increased taxes 11 times in 8 yrs and never re-paid Soc Sec.
Budget priorities must change for the U.S. to survive, like it or not.
9
After reading the "Reader Picks", it is clear that the Sander supporters are out in force. My response to them is that I, as a liberal Democratic voter, accept his word and believe he is a socialist. In that case, he will never win. This country is not going to vote for a Socialist. While the Republicans may try and tar any other Democratic candidate as a socialist, none of them will hold up their hand and say, yes, I am a socialist.
I am bothered by the reports of threatening behavior by Sanders' supporters to those who disagree with his candidacy - and some of the comments I have read by his supporters are dismissive of anyone who does not agree with him. The Senate Chaplain today reminded the Senators that ethical behavior is to do unto others as you would have them do unto you. The nasty comments about Hillary Clinton continue to this day - not a hopeful sign. Personally I prefer a candidate who is hopeful and positive; Sanders is neither. He had a chance to be honest about his conversation with Elizabeth Warren - others have questioned if a woman could win the Presidency. But he lied about it - I find that lie very hard to forgive.
4
Many voters who need to be motivated to vote for a Democrat have "consciences." Trump voters in 2020 will express their anger and fear. They can't say this time that they don't know their man. And they can't hope for better from him.
So, when Bernie Sanders' faults are exaggerated-- as they will be by the Trump/Fox machine--it's possible that they may cause potential Democratic voters to throw up their hands and stay home because they are more susceptible to the despairing view that "they're-all-the-same anyway." It's possible.
This has been the bane of American progressive politics. Are anger and fear and cynicism stronger motivating factors than optimism for radical change? I honestly don't know. Idealism and hope worked for Obama; anger and fear for Trump. I do know that protecting their old legacy hasn't worked as well recently, for Democrats, as demanding change.
I'll work for Elizabeth Warren, and vote for any Democrat in order to get rid of a deranged would-be tyrant. But if Biden is nominated and then elected as the candidate-for-all-seasons we're just postponing any solution to the real problems of this country.
3
AMEN! As a former SDSer, long-ago DSA member, and then a Bernie supporter in the early 2000s, I now acknowledge that Bernie & his revolution cannot win against Trump in 2020. And beating Trump is more important than any optimistic policy he proposes.
I was a Gene McCarthy supporter and agonized over whether I was “selling out” if I voted for Humphrey, but I did and Nixon won anyway. And then I knew the country would have been better off with Humphrey in many many ways.
We must beware of over-optimistic hopes of the “people rising up” to embrace a “new revolution”.
8
And let's also look a the last UK election where despite having the most dysfunctional Conservative party in history, Labor was still thrashed in a defeat of near historic proportions, despite the promises of free college, nationalization of train companies, free internet and various other promises of free. Even the most desperate could not believe that everything could be free for all and Labor lost all credibility with its working class roots where constituencies who had voted Labor for over a century switched to the dysfunctional conservatives.
6
I voted for Sanders in the 2016 primary and will probably vote for him again. I have one question I would like to ask him, what would he do if Mitch McConnell stonewalled him as he did of President Obama in making a nomination to the Supreme Court? That one decision was the most corrupt decision ever in my lifetime. I would hope that Sanders would have a fitting answer that would prevent this from ever happening again.
3
As a former American history teacher I send Egan's 'motion' to read up on WJ Bryan and the attendant populists of the 1890's and the Progressives who would have likely faded into obscurity if Teddy Roosevelt had become President when McKinley was assassinated in 1901.
But why go back over a century, which is far too much to ask of our history-deficient populace. 'Just' go back about 50 years to 1972 when the idealists of the 60's--like I was--put their blind faith in George McGovern agains one of the most despised Presidents of the 20th century, on Richard Nixon.
McGovern won one state after he was shredded in the campaign; one of the massive ironies of Watergate was that Nixon would have won without any such conspiracy. So yeah, "OK Boomer" us but folks, we can't afford to repeat those missteps. A re-elected Trump will destroy our democracy as we know and revere it.
6
If a Bernie Sanders can't win, America deserves Trump. I know that's harsh, but if Americans don't have it in them to demand progressive change, they will end up with the only alternative that seems to have momentum not just in America, but globally: cronyism covered by a thick veneer of blood and soil nationalism.
A certain segment of the white middle class seems to think that there's a way to return to the Clinton/Bush/Obama consensus of neoliberal economics softened by a modest bit of social justice and environmentalism. But that consensus, while it worked extremely well for the mostly white managerial and professional classes, failed nearly everyone else. Trump is one reaction against that consensus. You can only counter Trump with an opposite reaction equally as strong. Trying to go back to what wasn't working will hand Trump the win.
13
Couldn’t have said it better myself.
William Jennings Bryan: "Look him up, kids." And while you are at it, look up Eugene McCarthy and George McGovern, both of whom I supported. Youthful idealism is a wonderful thing, but the Democratic Party needs to get real at this critical moment. I had hoped that young people could help defeat Trump, but if they get Sanders nominated, they will assure Trump's victory.
9
I agree that class warfare is NOT what we need at all. But I am not convinced that Sanders or Warren espouse anything of the sort. Do they not seek only a more equitable sharing of burdens and wiser spending on rebuilding the country?
I am much more conservative than Sanders on many points, especially free trade. But I support him because he will fight for causes that require true champions. I am beyond discouraged by Trump and the Republican Party and have given up on centrist Democrats like Biden who insist on showing up at gun fights with flowers and movie tickets. That was Neville Chamberlain's approach. It only encouraged the bad guys to do worse. We must stand up to villainy - openly and without apology.
Sanders and Warren make the case better than anyone for my highest priorities. They grasp that climate change is a worldwide emergency that requires our leadership and our immediate, ambitious action -- which we should view as a GREAT OPPORTUNITY, one that will immediately create millions of good-paying jobs. Both also plan to win down our forever wars, belligerent foreign policy, and bottomless spending on the military.
Both also favor more investment in education and strong antitrust enforcement to break up the monopolies and oligopolies that make commerce too hard or impossible for most independent businesses.
They will not accomplish all of their proposals, but they will fight to do so rather than appease the bad guys. We have tried it that way already.
4
There isn't enough attention being paid to the Senate. Regardless of which candidate wins the Democratic nomination, they will not see their agenda come to pass without the Democrats having the majority in the Senate.
3
Egan still doesn't understand why we lost 2016. He claims that Trump will beat Bernie by representing a safer, more constrained presidency. That is—to use a term Egan might understand—"malarkey." Trump ran as a blow up the system candidate. He promised to shake up Washington and buck the system. That was his central message and appeal, and it worked wonders against a "return to normalcy" Clinton campaign. Bernie is also a change candidate, albeit a far more genuine one who can challenge Trump at his own game. Every-time I hear a pundit claim that Democrats can only beat Trump by running their own Republican is another donation I make to the Sanders campaign.
9
I struggle to understand how Sen. Sanders would build a coalition in Congress strong enough to pass legislation for any of his platform ideas. Even if Sanders wins and the Dems win control of the house and senate, which is a long shot, many centralist dems would need to commit political suicide to get anything passed for Bernie ensuring defeat for them in 2022.
3
@Matt
If you bothered to listen to Bernie Sanders, you might struggle less. The Times editorial board asked exactly this question of Mr. Sanders when they interviewed him, and they got their answer.
Any elected official who wants real change in this country has to appeal to the electorate at large -- rather than pacify lobbyists, contend with the vested interests of corporate media or try to shame bought politicians. This means going to Kentucky and explaining exactly how Mitch McConnell is robbing his constituents blind.
Of course, if you expect Sanders to conduct business as usual, like Obama did and Biden, Pete B. and Amy Klobuchar certainly would, nothing will get done. Which is the point of conducting business in just that way -- no fundamental change takes place by design, to use Biden's own words.
3
Couldn’t agree more with this assessment.
4
Mr. Egan: yes, things worked out so well for Democrats in the swing states when we nominated a centrist, corporation-friendly candidate in 2016.
6
Many said Trump couldn't win too. Many said if he did they'd move to Canada. I honestly want to know if Bernie wins, where would Timothy feel inclined to consider moving that's like the contemporary US he'd miss? I'm struggling to think of a single wealthy democratic country more like how the US is now than how Bernie would like to make it. In not one of them is private enterprise or "capitalism" non-existent. Not one of them self-identifies or could be accurately described as "socialist". This article reeks of ignorance or corruption.
7
Whether or not Sanders or Biden or Warren or any of the others should be the nominee will be decided by the primaries. Claims that someone "can't win" are premature. If Sanders can turn out the base in battleground states, as widely claimed, he may walk away with the nomination. The state by state polls right now suggest that it may be difficult for him to win half the delegates, but stranger things have happened. If the nominating process is prolonged, people will need to coalesce around the ticket quickly, with energy and enthusiasm. I assume that the VP choice will balance the ticket this time, so there will be grounds for enthusiasm for whose first choice did not win the nomination. Those who walk away from the democratic ticket because they don't like the result will have to live with potentially contributing to Trump being re-elected and the Supreme Court being held by the right wing for a generation at least.
3
I agree that Bernie Sanders is not the best person to run against Trump, and that's because he's not the best President to serve after Trump -- to deal with the wreckage and get the country back on course. Under Bernie the Democratic Party would remain deeply divided, and the nation would be even more riven by dissent and dysfunction.
That said, as a progressive Democrat I believe we will never be able to repay our debt to Bernie's example and the energy and vision that he has brought forth in many who are now in office, and in millions of citizens who without him would be paying little or no attention to politics.
3
Why do pundits and the media as a whole always recommend voting in some strategic fashion that they predict will end in the desired result, a type of game theory approach to democracy, never mind that they are essentially guessing, just like stock pickers. Why not vote your passion, and your hopes and your values ? "Electability" is a fraudulent concept---meant to convince you that your candidate cant win. The whole system works when both candidate and voters are authentic and genuine, not conniving and strategic. If Bernie wins the nomination then loses to Trump, so what ? Hillary the cautious triangulator lost too. Just maybe we should pay attention when 70+ % of Dems under 40 support Sanders, maybe us Boomers should stop assuming we know the world so well. I was raised in Massachusetts, I still remember 1972 when our bumper stickers read " Don't blame me, I voted McGovern" Voting is a demonstration of values and ethics, lets treat it as such.
5
No one “knows” the world. McGovern was a dilettante despite his war record. The image of him windsurfing painted him as disconnected from the majority. Boomers are not all old farts recommending some safe course. I know many boomers who are voting for Bernie. Also do not discount how much trashing of ballots will still continue. Stacy Abrams should be governor of Georgia. There is more than amateur strategic voting at play here. Gerrymandering, corporate bribery, and other crooked political tricks have played a large part in our elections as well.
If anyone will beat Trump 100% guaranteed, then, I'll jump on that bandwagon. But, the reality is, no one can guarantee a 100% win. No one. Hillary came the closest, with most polls showing above 80% chance. I learned my lesson there and then.
So, rather than getting consumed by who can or can't beat Trump, let's stay true to our heart and go with the candidate who stands up for who we are and what we believe in.
I'm not surprised that many people are choosing Bernie. Bernie wants to help the underprivileged people by shrinking inequality and preventing big money from buying political favors. He wants to end the endless wars and shrink the military complex, by doing so creating tens of billions of dollars to help fund healthcare for everyone. He wants to help the racial minorities by fixing the criminal justice system. He can be trusted. He has the track record to prove it.
Let's go back to the original idea of capitalism that those who work hard get rewarded. This is no longer the case for many people, because most wealthy parents pass on the wealth to their children. Our current system rewards even those who are less productive as long as their parents are wealthy.
Bernie is not a socialist. He's a democrat who wants to strengthen our social services so that the less fortunate people have a decent shot in our capitalism that needs lots of improvement.
7
Bernie has one thing the other candidates don't have. He has the will of the people behind him. Americans are smart enough to know that their lives haven't improved over the last three years and that our nation needs real leadership at home and abroad because they know our credibility world wide has been eroded by a lack of moral authority. If you keep saying he can't win and label him a 'socialist', you become part of the problem. Bernie offers American's solutions to their biggest fears. He may not be perfect. His ideas may not always work in practice, but at least he's offering ideas and solutions to solve some of our largest issues. We need real leadership. Try offering some solutions instead of just critique.
14
This is a great article and as someone who spent his childhood years in a communist country I DO worry about Sanders' coziness with totalitarian regimes. In fact, I would argue that they are of more serious sort that those of Trump because Sanders is a more serious person. Not a fragile ego looking with awe towards the real strongmen of the world, but rather somebody who must have realized the horrors of the Soviet Union and yet thought them being no bad enough to stay away. But I think that Bernie need not necessarily lose against Trump. After all Trump is unpopular, and certainly doesn't look invincible. I wish he could be bested by somebody who does not want a revolution, but I wouldn't underestimate Sanders' chances in the general elections.
The fact that people are seriously concerned with M4A's cost but not the cost of being in a state of perpetual military conflict for almost 20 years seriously boggles the mind. This column, much like the plethora of ones before it, talk down to those who would want to dramatically change the country for the better. "Those countries over there, where all that you want already exists, couldn't happen here. It's impossible. America is not (or shall ever be) ready for something different." To that I say, only a person of privilege, who is already comfortable wishes not to seek dramatic change. I have seen friends and peers struggle to make ends meet. I see this supposed 'booming' economy yet I partake not it its fruit. I see why Reverend King was so frustrated, seeing that a brighter future for all can be in reach, only to be brought down not by the white supremacists but by those privileged who proclaim "That’s hardly the best condition for overthrowing the system."
9
FDR's presidency put in place in the 1930s many of the proposals that William Jennings Bryan advocated in the Gilded Age, 30 years before.
Too bad the American people had to suffer through the Great Depression before Bryan's ideas could carry the day.
7
I will vote for any democrat who receives the nomination, but I also don't live in Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, Mchigan, or any other state that really matters in winning the next election.
Sorry to say, I don't think the average voters in those states parse Socialist, Democratic Socialist, European Center Left, what have you.
It is clear that the Republicans will paint Sanders with a broad brush and that their message will be received that way by the average voter.
All it took was a shadow of a doubt about HRC to turn moderate Obama voters into Trump voters. Repubs will have a gleefully easy time casting that shadow over Sanders.
Anyone who doesn't take that into consideration is deluding themselves.
4
Tim may be right, but my bigger fear if Sanders is nominated is that he DOES win. There is no widespread support for his policies; his victory would be entirely a repudiation of Trump. It’s hard to see any of his key proposals getting passed. More likely, an already skeptical electorate sours on him, and the Dems get hammered in the off-year elections. Bernie spends his last two years in the White House writing his memoirs while the Republicans, handed the gift of being free of Trump, pave the way for President Romney.
2
Sorry, I don't see any point or substance to this column besides Sanders-bashing. The first half is devoted to bringing up every questionable thing that could possibly be linked to Bernie while not providing context -- in itself a form of fake news. Getting tired of all these columns claiming that Bernie can't win; if anyone really thought that, they wouldn't be writing about him. Instead Bernie is making people who are comfortable with the status quo nervous. The rest of us are here for it.
18
Hear hear!!!!
1
Mr Egan seems to forget that voters are thoroughly fed up with "business as usual": A zero-sum economic system that enriches corporations and a few wealthy donors at the everyone else's expense, and a political system that exclusively serves the greed of those same corporations and wealthy donors.
In 2016, the elites of both parties either failed or refused to recognize any of that. Democrats had already anointed Hillary Clinton, who offered "business as usual" and the best return on donor investment. Republicans offered Jeb!, Cruz, and Rubio, Koch-snorting "movement conservatives" who delighted donors with the shopworn Republican agenda of tax cuts and deregulation.
But Republicans rejected conservative orthodoxy in favor of an orange charlatan who promised (with crossed fingers) to "be their voice" and "drain the swamp." Simultaneously, Democrats in 22 states rejected Hillary's "business as usual" in favor of a self-proclaimed socialist who offered an alternative to the zero-sum plunder capitalism that is destroying this country. The elites neutralized that threat, but still don't seem to understand why she lost.
Voters want someone who stands for making their lives better. That's what Sanders and Warren offer. If the elites insist on again offering us "business as usual," this time in the form of Joe Biden, it proves they learned nothing from 2016. In that case, we had best resign ourselves to living as subjects of the the kleptocrat authoritarian King Donald.
12
Bernie may be able to peel off some disillusioned Trump supporters, as a few readers here argue, but I have no faith that he can win over the moderate, swing voters who made it possible for the Democrats to flip 40 seats and take the House in 2018.
These swing voters are real—not "mythical" as some on the left argue. They include moderate Republicans, suburban women and traditional lunch-pail Democrats, among others. https://tinyurl.com/syeyjhu
These "persuadable" voters are the key to the Electoral College in 2020 (although you wouldn’t know that from the Democratic debates, or this comment board). They might vote for a Biden or Bloomberg, but likely would draw the line at a Sanders or Warren.
To win over this critical cohort, the Democrats must move quickly past impeachment, and return to the bread-and-butter issues that worked so well for them in 2018.
The fate of this republic hangs on a very slender thread, yet many liberal Democrats are unaware of it, or in denial of it. Any valid discussion of Sanders' electability must look long and hard at these swing voters.
5
@Ron Cohen There is one real reason that the Democratic party won in 2018. Hillary wasn't on the ticket.
4
The author is wrong. Yes, the things pointed out would’ve happened in the past but I genuinely believe we are in a new Gilded Age that makes the roaring twenties look like a joke. Many Americans have faced a dwindling lifestyle for decades for the first time in our country’s history. Billionaires have been playing a game called ‘Just how much can we get away with?’ And I think they have finally pushed too far. Our education system is in turmoil, wages are not rising as they should be, our healthcare system is waiting to implode, and the environment can’t take anymore. There was no climate change debate in the 20’s. That makes it a whole different situation which is not analogous to the Gilded Age at all.
7
If Sanders is nominated not only will the Democrats not win the presidency or the Senate they will lose the House. Disaster.
6
America already knows Bernie is a "socialist" (even though he isn't really) so the idea that his approval will tank when he gets attacked for being a "socialist" doesn't really make any sense. Bernie will turn out the Democrat base. Biden won't, for the exact same reasons Hillary didn't. It seems that a lot of Democrats didn't learn their lesson from 2016.
15
@Mike
If a significant percentage of the electorate will knee-jerk react to the descriptor “socialist,” how will they react to the idea of electing a “gay” president?
The idea of allowing the ignorance or prejudice of some of the electorate to control our political process is galling. However, the present primary purpose of the Democratic party is to unseat a dangerously unfit president, to replace him with a competent one.
Practicality must prevail.
Our nation and our democracy is currently more imperiled than at any time in our history with the exception of the Civil War.
1
Don't you all understand this is about an anti-establishment vote? There are many poles out that show Bernie could have beaten Trump last time and could do so again. This isn't about Republicans vs. Democrats. This is about changing the way our politics works and getting the money out of it. Biden, Klobuchar and the rest are all mainstream Dems and politics in Washington would never change. They are no different than the Republicans. I keep saying they should all wear jackets like Nascar drivers so we can see who their corporate sponsors are. If you want real change stop voting for the status quo.
12
That word is traditionally spelled “polls.” Maybe thats just the establishment position.
Joe Biden has indicated willingness to step aside if Mitt Romney becomes a Presidential candidate. Could this be the winning ticket to get Trump out if impeachment fails, or the better alternative than impeachment?
2
This is a mischaracterization. Biden simply suggested that he wouldn't be running if someone like a Mitt Romney were campaigning for reelection.
2
It’s a fairly solid indication that corporate Democrats are no different than corrupt Republicans. Who’s side are y’all on? Vote for Bernie and we all win.
2
Thank you, Mr. Egan; my feelings exactly. A Bernie boom might result in runaway victories in New York (City), California and maybe even Massachusetts. He may just win the popular vote as Al and Hillary did- through huge victories in states where Trump couldn't triumph even if he were endorsed by the ghosts of Franklin Roosevelt and Eugene Debs. In the Electoral College, however, it would clearly be a rout, and we'll be stuck with The Donald for another four years and with a right-wing Supreme Court for at least a generation. I'll say it again: Joe Biden can win in Middle America and he'll give progressives four-fifths of what we want. Trump, on the other hand, will take away four-fifths of what we now have. Should we gamble that the enthusiasm Bernie engenders on the left will soon spread to encompass the Midwestern Democrats who put Trump in office in 2016? I'd take that bet, along with the Detroit Lions in 2020, but only with more points than the folks in Vegas could possibly offer me.
6
@stu freeman Stu, the only thing I disagree with you about is how much Trump will take, I'd put it at 100% as long as the Republicans let him, and they will.
1
@stu freeman
Folks always forget that the machine that delivered the popular vote for Hillary was a national network of hardworking Democratic Party activists in every state, every county, every city, every zip code. They know where the votes are and they get them to turnout on election day. Hard to believe Democratic rank & file at the street level will be highly motivated by an old white guy who disdains the Democratic Party but is happy to hijack it for his personal ambition.
No track record of working with his colleagues in either the House or the Senate, or even managing a national campaign with a cabal of rigid ideologues who treat women badly and are full of themselves. They see Bernie as their free ride to act out their adolescent daddy issues, which is how Sanders treats the Democratic Party.
Anyone who thinks there is a solid anyone-but-Trump vote underestimates how fickle and easily confused too many Americans are with a Hobson's choice between the guy who's rich and tough-acting (decisive some think) and an angry old guy who can't explain how he'll pay for his pipe dreams or enact any of his proposals without any legislative savvy. We saw with Obama the limits of Executive Orders as a policy tool.
Even Senate colleagues in his at-arms-length caucus see him as a political cipher.
Americans prefer the devil they know over the self-righteous prophet of vengeance and retribution.
Sanders has two endorsements Biden and Warren don't: Trump and Putin.
1
Is Bernie our next FDR, or next George McGovern?
Trump wasn't supposed to win. Neither is Bernie. Read that either way, because none of us really know what's going to happen in November. It's up to whether a few hundred thousand voters in a handful of states who may or may not deign to vote.
One thing is certain: a process that relegates initial selection to primaries in three small states and then allocates power in the national decision to handful of vast, sparsely populated states is a process broken. Our country must fix that or we will watch helplessly as the coasts decide to go their own way and leave "the heartland" to its own devices.
7
@Stuart
Along the same lines, the nine must populous states are home to more than fifty-one percent of the American people. These states are entitled to eighteen senators. The other forty-one states elect eighty-two senators.
This fact, of course, has a huge impact on the electoral college.
There are changes that must be addressed in order to insure fair national elections in our country.
4
Bernie's socialism looks to northern Europe, not Venezuela, Cuba, or the Soviet Union. He wants to make our capitalists behave, not eliminate them. But reasoning with them and making deals with them does not work. They will behave only if they are scared into behaving.
Persuading most people not to trust them will break their power to misbehave with impunity, and nothing else will. Most people are not naive enough to trust their employers not to dump on them when dumping is profitable. This attitude needs to be generalized to employers in general, so that invading their privacy and proprietary stuff will be supported whenever there is evidence that they are overstepping the boundaries we have laid down for them.
Our lack of safety nets or plans to counteract the effects of various sorts of deindustrialization keeps people supporting and defending the employers they know are not trustworthy, because the only existing alternative to being dumped on by employers is to have employers move their jobs to areas where people will tolerate being dumped on.
3
I will vote for Bernie. I’m mean c’mon, that’s a pretty easy choice for most liberals. Will it be an easy choice for disaffected Republicans?? I don’t think so.
We could be looking at another Electoral College loss...
2
Thank you!! This is why we need a candidate like Pete instead.
2
No. Bernie cannot win. As fervent as his zealots are, the anit-Bernie ones as more zealous, higher in number, and have international technical assistance and tons of money. Those in the middle will see two babbling old fogies and wonder why they should change one for the other. Lots of moderate Democrats will stay home for Bernie, like lots of 2016 Bernieites stayed home for Hillary.
4
No, Bernie supporters did not stay home for Hillary. In fact, more Hillary supporters in 2008 failed to vote for Obama than Bernie supporters failed to vote for Hillary. Get your facts straight. It’s really not hard to Google.
Same procedure as last election. More of the usual NYTimes bashing - or not reporting - of Sanders and his policies.
... but just to set things straight, even though it has been pointed out more than often enough, Mr Egan: what Bernie Sanders is promoting is not socialism but social democracy. And it´s accepted in all democracies. (I would have added "other democracies", but in view of the 2016 election and the course of the impeachment process, it is ever more obvious that the US is no longer a democracy.)
I assume that "democratic socialism" is used, because there is already a social democrat party in the US. Whatever, using the moniker "democratic socialist" is like disqualifying oneself from the start.
7
@bjmoose1
Thank you, Bernie is a Social Democrat. As my friend in Oslo was always pointing out to me, Norway is not really a socialist country. He was an entrepeneur, working solo, and could afford a nice apartment in a trendy neighborhood.
I love Tim Egan. Especially when he’s right.
3
@GJO There's no doubt that he's "right".
1
the country is fine enough with Trump using kremlin propaganda to help his campaign for a second time but socialism, oh that creates the inherent backlash of our dna? read about union workers in PA that hold obama against biden and you'd see those swing voters want bernie or trump. they don't care about russia or socialism.
1
Yet another smear piece on Bernie.
They said the same thing about Trump. That he couldn't win.
Bernie can absolutely win.
16
All of the past winning Democratic Candidates have been Republican lite. That is what the country is.
Bernie and Liz will be smeared as gun grabbing abortionist socialists.
There are moderate voters I know who could not stomach, or vote for either. They might just stay home. Or worse vote for Trump.
Most of us peons just want a winner, and BerLiz isn't it.
3
Bernie is my president ... and it’s about time we changed from economics based on never ending growth and the ‘rational man’ who lives for profits and instead places us as part of a living system, in doughnut economics. Research Kate Raworth...
5
Once upon a time, not long ago, there was a man named Norman Thomas who ran for President many times as a socialist. He wanted things like medical coverage, unemployment insurance, disability, a pension plan and more. What nutty ideas!
3
Just remember the NY Times backed Hillary in the 2016 fiasco.
Revolutions come in all shades and styles. Is a country where more than half the US Senate is a cowering tool of a would-be dictator what we want? Bernie offers a real chance at change. This country desperately needs it.
10
What confounds me repeatedly is that the very bright and educated columnists of the Times don’t know what Socialism means. It’s a real head scratcher that their fact checkers and they themselves don’t even question or investigate Sanders’ own claim to be a Socialist. He’s not. At its core, Socialism is workers owning the means of production. It died in 1918 when Lenin and Trotsky subordinated workers to a maximal leader—Lenin—and Bolshevism was born. The former USSR used the moniker because it was popular among its people, and the West naturally used skillfully as propaganda by tying Socialism to the repression of totalitarianism. Even if Bernie successfully nationalized health care, and therefore one-sixth of the economy as Egan claims, it wouldn’t be a Socialist victory because Sanders isn’t suggesting that the government take over hospitals, etc. He’s a New Deal Democrat who believes in the trust busting that Egan ironically claims we need, but more important he’s repudiating forty years of neoliberalism that has elevated unaccountable private power—corporate tyranny—to sacred status among the elites. If you do believe that we need massive change so that ordinary folks shouldn’t beg to make a living, then the time is ripe to seize the day. And Bernie is the answer.
5
If watching a TV show on a subscription network is the only thing that has stirred you to consider addressing income and wealth inequality, you have lived a very privileged life. It also shows why Bernie's movement confuses you. People support him because of the material changes his policies would create. The handwringing from an ivory tower will not change that support, which is countrywide......as his donors show. But other candidates do have the "two zip code problem": Biden, Buttigieg, and Warren, whose fundraising is centered on Delaware, South Bend, and Boston, respectively.
4
The whole idea of America is to get rich. Long live Capitalism!
3
Toxic capitalism is literally and figuratively killing life on earth. We can do better by basing a new economic system within the living earth or we jump of this current mass extinction event cliff like Gordon Gecko lemmings. Sanders2020
Back in the old days we had another word for those with power who held rigid and unyielding opinions, and who led a nasty mob - demagogue.
3
Good to hear a liberal Democrat talk about the Socialist candidate in realistic and measured way. Any moderate and or even liberal Democrat needs to honestly evaluate the socialist agenda by Bernie Sanders :
1. End private insurance and transfer one sixth of the economy into the goverment hands. Ultimately have 70% of economy in government hands
2. Forgive private college debts of private citizens with your tax dollars. Pay out reparations from your tax dollars to descendant of slavery.
3. Massive increases in taxes for tax paying classes (middle and upper middle class) including huge increses in payroll taxes
4. Massive tax increases on job producing companies leading to big increases in unemployment and increse to invesment related taxes both leading to huge drops of all 401Ks
5. Virtual opening of our border to massive illegal immigration taking away jobs from US citizens
6. Even more massive budget deficits and national debt (worsening an already bad record by Trump)
7. Reorientation of our Foreign Policy to favor all types of left wing dictatorship and appesement of Iran and North Korea and terrorist oranizations. Sanders has actually said that he "regrets" his vote to allow military intervention in Afghanistan to take out Al Queda. Incredibly he would have preferred that we did not military intervene after 9/11
This is not an exhausitve list of his Socialist agenda. No matter how much you hate Trump, as a Democrat do you truly want this man to be president?
3
@Robert . Even if all this came to pass, which we all know it can't and won't, I still say Yes. We so need aomeone to break the hold of the Corporatist sytem, and Bernie is the only one with the guts and gumption to do it.
4