The Myth of Sanders' electability

[BmorePat87]

(05-12-2016, 01:48 PM)Vas Deferens Wrote: Yes, he has been ignored.  By the media.  Hillary didn't bring it up 'his past' in debates, just like Bernie didn't bring up all the RECENT bullshit surrounding Hillary.  



Lying?  I think we'd be better off asking Hillary about her 'lies' than focusing on open / closed primary bernie supporter 'lies'.  What are your thoughts on the bullshit that went down in AZ?  

I get it.  Bernie is older than the ideal candidate.  He's got a long history of saying crazy shit.  He's got weird ideas that a lot of people can't fathom because it breaks with their world view and might affect their utopian pathetic existence.  But, at least he's not hillary. Listen, peg me as suspending rational thought and focusing on my emotions, but the idea that the next best democratic candidate for POTUS just happens to be the a former first lady absolutely infuriates me.   Put all the other terrible things about hillary aside.  Think about that.  Think about the infinitesimal chances...  This is supposed to be a democracy.  And the next POTUS candidate is the wife of a former POTUS.  I abhor nepotism in all contexts.  Its the same concept that rubbed me raw with GWB.  Its like saying the best backup QB for carson just so ***** happens to be jordan...  Having this jammed down my throat over and over again is just intolerable. 

Correct, the whole point of the article is Bernie's past has not been brought up. I'm glad we agree on that. 

This isn't a discussion of whether or not we think she has lied, this is a discussion of electability. When one makes the argument that he does better in open primaries, hence he'll do better with independents, that should be true. It is not. 

There are a number of legitimate arguments against Hillary, and no one is discrediting those. If you read the article, they note that Hillary may be one of the most scrutinized candidates ever prior to a general election. Everything is on the table and has been for decades. The article just states that you cannot begin to compare Bernie to her as Bernie has not been vetted the same way. This whole "Bernie clearly is the better candidate in general" argument may prove to be true AFTER he faces the same level of scrutiny that she has faced for his past, but he hasn't had to deal with that yet. 

Everyone's personal feelings towards Hillary are legitimate, but they're not going to change the fact that red flags in Bernie's past (yes, there are many) have been ignored by his opponents, but not because there's nothing there.