The Myth of Sanders' electability

[BmorePat87]

(05-12-2016, 04:18 PM)Yojimbo Wrote: Not to mention the last minute purges of voters that are currently being litigated.

So he would have only lost by a little over 200k votes (if all of those purged were his supporters)?

[SteelCitySouth]

(05-12-2016, 04:31 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: It isn't. As a Marylander, I can attest to that. It's merely the line used by the King to take away land from Maryland and establish the borders for MD, PA, and DE. Maryland's original colonial grant gave it control of much of Southern PA (up to the 40th parallel). 50 years later when PA was established, King Charles said that PA's southern border was MD's northern border, but used a map with an error on it and misread where MD's border was. This line just settled the issue, taking much of MD's land away so that PA could have a port city (Philly). 

If we're looking at trends, using regions is far more reliable than just saying, anything north of Maryland's north border is "the North" and is similar. the Midwest is far different from the mid Atlantic region. Even just referring to the "North", most just include the Mid-Atlantic from MD up and New England, just as the Southwest and isn't called "the South". 

I get what you're saying, though, and, yes, I shouldn't speak in absolutes for why someone lost. He lost for a wide variety of reasons beyond negative campaigning. 

Okay.  I was wrong about the Mason Dixon line...However you are incorrect as well to narrow the traditionally Northern states to basically the north east when many Midwestern states were involved as well.  When you look at the traditionally norther vs traditionally southern states my point becomes pretty clear in my last post.

[xxlt]

(05-11-2016, 10:51 PM)Yojimbo Wrote: Sanders was born and raised in a very low income family with any immigrant father from Poland.

http://www.tabletmag.com/jewish-news-and-politics/192931/bernie-sanders-story


As to the whole "free stuff" argument, it's not. It is paid for by the taxes that we pay. I'd much rather my taxes be used for healthcare, education and infrastructure in this country, rather than spending it in countries that our neo-con politicians think need to "fixed" so we can have their oil.

Pesky facts! And rational opinions! Where are you from anyway, comrade?

[xxlt]

(05-12-2016, 09:39 AM)Wyche Wrote: I'd like to add that I'd rather our dime go toward that than toward MORE corporate welfare to companies who outsource our jobs, hide profits in offshore accounts, and don't pay taxes while enjoying the fruits of our nation and infrastructure without reinvestment into it.  For example, GEs CEO stresses China to his managers and relocating facilities there to gain "a competitive advantage", yet when GE needed a bailout, was he asking China for help?  No, he wanted the American taxpayer to fund it.  I just don't understand the mentality of people who still buy into this trickle down bullshit.....the greatest farce ever sold to the American public.  For what it's worth, I'm not a Sanders supporter, but at least he is calling out the REAL moochers and leaches.

Testify!

[BmorePat87]

(05-12-2016, 05:03 PM)SteelCitySouth Wrote: Okay.  I was wrong about the Mason Dixon line...However you are incorrect as well to narrow the traditionally Northern states to basically the north east when many Midwestern states were involved as well.  When you look at the traditionally norther vs traditionally southern states my point becomes pretty clear in my last post.

I'm just saying that the Midwest isn't "the North". Before the Civil War, what we now call the "Northeast" was "the North". During the Civil War and shortly after, it also included some free states in the Midwest. 

To suggest his success in the Midwest is indicative of what could have been in NY over how he did in the states in NY's region is what I am essentially taking issue with. 

[Aquapod770]