(02-04-2020, 03:16 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: Most Bernie supporters are great. His online base, the Bernie Bro’s, is horrendous.

Whether it’s Twitter, Reddit, or Facebook, they’re promoting conspiracy theories about the reason for the delay, falsely claiming Buttigieg funded it, and calling Pete “rat” and “Mayor Cheat”.

It’s worthy of condemnation. It undermines the process and plays into Trump and Russia’s shared narrative. It ignores the fact that maybe it wasn’t rigged, maybe Pete’s strategy of focusing on having a captain at nearly every district was the right play in a caucus, given the data released on social media that Pete gained the most in the realignment round. He played the delegate game and it appears he’ll be able to claim victory later today.

No it’s easier to say it’s rigged. Just like how the poll 2 days before was obviously canceled because Bernie won it...

(02-04-2020, 01:53 PM)Crazyjdawg Wrote: Conspiracy theories are born of lack of information and lack of transparency.

I think Bernie supporters are just overcorrecting for what happened in 2016. They're convinced everything is a con or cover up to keep Bernie from winning the nomination.

Full disclosure, I am a Bernie supporter and I notice that the mainstream media and DNC definitely are not fans of Bernie and are trying to undermine him and convince people not to vote for him at nearly every turn.

But I don't subscribe to the conspiracy theories.

(02-04-2020, 03:22 PM)treee Wrote: For what its worth, I'm sure there are plenty of alt-right trolls that get their kicks from impersonating as a candidate's supporter and stirring the pot (which is so easy to do on twitter). I think the whole "Bernie-bro" thing is overblown. I've browsed the message boards of multiple candidates, and Bernie's didn't seem any less cordial than the others.

(02-04-2020, 03:35 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: I respectfully disagree. There’s plenty of first hand accounts of the culture in his 2016 campaign that allowed for this behavior, including harassment against female staffers.

There’s plenty of people with a long history of supporting Sanders engaging in this behavior. It’s not just a few alt right trolls (which I’m sure do exist).

Venture into any comment section of a news article on Facebook if you want to see it.

(02-04-2020, 03:49 PM)treee Wrote: I just don't think it is likely that someone would be an LGBTQ+ ally and a misogynist. The two attitudes are completely at odds.

(02-04-2020, 03:49 PM)treee Wrote: I just don't think it is likely that someone would be an LGBTQ+ ally and a misogynist. The two attitudes are completely at odds.

(02-04-2020, 05:26 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: it’s not uncommon nor is it fair to label all of his supporters as allies in the same sense that he is.

There’s also a number of people who label themselves an ally who are still intolerant of trans folk. These seemingly hypocritical stances exist.

(02-04-2020, 05:42 PM)treee Wrote: Yea Terfs are the worst. I guess my point was that I think Sanders brings out way way more good in people than he does bad. He inspires a lot of people in a way that none of the other candidates do, to my observation. I think he can excite a movement that has the critical mass to push through Republican stonewalling and red tape of the capitol. The Dems need a high turnout for this next election and I think Bernie has the highest turnout ceiling of any of these other candidates.

(02-12-2020, 12:24 AM)BmorePat87 Wrote: Warren is done even if she won't admit it.

Pete continues to surprise but can he carry that on?

The Progressive base isn't as large as 2016 but is benefiting from the Moderate base being fractured. The longer they all stick in, the more Bernie will win.

(02-12-2020, 02:35 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: I'm just going to vent my frustrations on here about the Bernie crowd. My Facebook feed is filled with their asinine conspiracy theories. I've taken to calling them on their bullshit, today. One for posting one tweet from a news outlet to highlight their bias while ignoring the numerous ones before and after that said the very thing he was claiming they weren't saying. Then when I brought up the topic of the fractured moderate vote and the fact that more people are voting for the more moderate candidates over the liberal ones and that making the question of what the electorate wants an important one, I was told those were "fake statistics."

I compared that person to a Trump supporter in their dismissal of objective data.

(02-14-2020, 03:42 AM)Crazyjdawg Wrote: For clarification, did they literally call them fake statistics? Or did they say it's a broad assumption that, at the moment, people are strictly voting along policy lines? 

(02-14-2020, 03:42 AM)Crazyjdawg Wrote: What I mean is: The most recent "2nd choice" polling data was released just before NH in which Biden voters' second choice was, surprisingly, most often Bernie.

That poll tells me that people voting for moderates aren't necessarily moderates. They're potentially voting on "electability." So Biden was their number 1 choice because they believe he can beat Trump, probably because the media has told them that.

If that's the case, then the story isn't nearly as grim for Bernie as it looks if you just combine Pete's, Amy's and Joe's numbers from New Hampshire and compare them to Bernie's. When you look at the votes cast in New Hampshire and Iowa, it looks like the moderates are overtaking the progressives. But those are two predominately white, relatively conservative/moderate states. But once you zoom out and start looking at the national picture, I'm not so sure that moderates are dominating progressives.

In recent national polling, accounting for Yang dropping out, the progressive vote adds up to about 39% and the moderate vote adds up to about 53% (presumably with 8% undecided) with 29% of those polled saying Bernie had the best chance of beating Trump (which ranked first). So progressives are behind, if we assume all progressives and moderates are voting along policy lines, but it's not nearly as wide as that one infographic that was circulating (Bernie vs the Moderates) would indicate.

Another really important thing to watch is the minority voters' choice in the next two contests. Klobuchar and Buttigieg are still polling horrendously with black and Hispanic people. 


So are they really competitive? I can't remember the last Democrat to win with little or no minority support.


Meanwhile, Bernie leads with Hispanic people by a fair margin (38%, 17% with Biden is 2nd) and only trails Biden with black people (35% for Biden, 27% for Bernie). If Biden drops, which he may have to if he performs poorly in South Carolina, I doubt those black voters choose Pete or Klobuchar over Bernie, since they are currently polling at 4% and 1%, respectively, with black people. Similarly, they are polling 6% and 2% with Hispanic people.


Another thing of note is that Bloomberg is inundating the country with ads and is polling surprisingly well (18% Post NH). It's unclear why but he has not yet participated in any debates (and therefore hasn't been met with nationally publicized scrutiny like the other candidates have) so his numbers aren't exactly stable. Are people polling for him because they actually like his policies? Or just because of recency bias? His ads basically only bash Trump after all, so it's not clear if the average person even knows what his policies are, let alone agrees with them. Especially with the last few questionable things that have come out about him recently (the thing about ending redlining causing the housing market crash and his justification for stop and frisk).


Reducing the race to progressives vs moderates is a bit reductive for these reasons. I'm not saying that Bernie isn't behind when you combine those moderate votes. That's undeniable. My point is just that people pick candidates for different reasons and they often aren't related to policy. It'll be interesting to see how it all develops.


But if the Bernie bros were denying reality then you are right to criticize them. We can't let our support for Bernie become cult like, as it has become with Trump. We need to keep perspective and view the race as it exists in reality. We mustn't become digital brown shirts...

(02-14-2020, 08:10 AM)Belsnickel Wrote: That is the reason I used the quotation marks. That was their actual, literal phrase.



I'm aware of all of this, and was trying to generate this sort of conversation. Instead it turned into a situation in which they were just denying the actual data in front of them.