Would Bernie have won against trump??

Would Bernie have won against trump??

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=l8XOZJkozfI)
snopes.com/bernie-sanders-audi-8/
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

Sadly, no.

Trump would have been BTFO. The only reason he one was because his opponent was a shitstain of a candidate.

Absolutely.

Gives a shit about you...

>doesn't know your name
>doesn't know your family
>doesn't know what is your job
>doesn't know what are your dreams
>doesn't even know how much money you have so he can tax that out of your pocket

I bet he knows everything about his R8 though.

Politicians are all the same.

Extremists are always winning. They are haters. Liberals are extremists. They always loose in long run...

Comfortably. He would have had enough people voting against him because of MUH COMMIES but as a pretty clean and experienced politicians who says reasonable things and favors the 'common man', it would have really contrasted with the Trump circus.

The Dems screwed him over and karma hit them hard.

Trump appeals to people who are greedy, stupid and afraid so maybe not.

He couldnt beat his own party what makes you think he could beat the other party. LooooooooooL

This makes no sense

No for the same reason Hillary lost.
The Hillary supporters would have been never Bernie, and not bothered to show up to the polls out of spite. That is how the left rolls. It amazes me that they win at anything.

The vote was rigged so Clinton went through, that's common knowledge.

oh for sure. Trump was based enough to bring out repub vets, but bernie could've easily have swayed the middle into his camp.

N o trump does not appeal to liberal and illegals.

Absolutely. The swing votes got swung by the populist rhetoric compared to hillarys unflavored unsweetened vanilla corporatism. He wouldn't have held a candle to bernie on that angle.

So he's not a communist, he's a... What was that again, a "democratic socialist".

Please look up what he did when he was a mayor in the 80s, where he spent his honeymoon and tell me again he does not support a soviet-style state.

very accurate. I'm guessing he's the dem pick for 2020 because of this

No Trump appealed to the we are tired of the two parties ass raping us crowd, or most of the country.
What bothers me is that neither parties voter look outside of the two parties for a solution.

he's more in the middle at heart, i'd say. I think he's got a lot of potential supporters on the rep side.

will explain. extreme means on both sides. tired of extreme nationalsists. tired or extreme liberals. we need to listen to the 80% caught in the middle. this includes non-muslims. all people equal ... treat them so

...

he'll be old as fuck then, though.

This. The contrast of "typical politician" and "non-politician" between Hillary and Trump was much bigger than it would have been between Sanders and Trump. People looking for change wouldn't have felt as much pressure to jump to Trump because he wouldn't have been the only one with that type of message or label. And all of this is to say nothing about the fact that Sanders had way less political baggage than Clinton, which was a major factor in Trump being able to smear her.

...

honestly i'd be surprised if he ran because of his age alone, ya

...

Quite probably. Most of Hillary's voters would have supported Bernie because they were either party loyal to democrats or just willing to do anything to stop Trump. Berniebros resigned to protest votes and even switched to Trump instead of back Hillary.

he'll be dead by 2024

What difference, at this point, does it make?

Do you think it's impossible to care about the population as a whole? I'll admit most politicians do not and are just corporate shills. But it's clear Sanders is a rare breed. One of the poorest members of congress who has taken on the establishment for decades.

I think a lot of libertarians would have voted for Bernie, but couldn't vote for Hillary. People are more centerist than you'd think.

>tfw Bernie will die in your lifetime ;_;

Pretty true IMO, i think bernie comes off as less "Washington DC" and more like your rich grandpa who's vocal about politics.
I don't think people would attack him on corruption, scandal etc. if he would've lost votes, it would've been because ppl outright disagreed with his policies.

If they're smart (major assumption), they'll run a similar but younger candidate. If the situation in 4 years isn't vastly better than now, they'll have a real chance of pushing Trump over.

maybe.

No.
Most of the people who supported him isn't of voting age.
It would probably be similiar to the actual out come.

not enough clueless millenials to overcome Trump's tsunami of support

liberals dont like democracy. they dont like people who dont agree with them. when you get old enough will will see this happen time and time again. they will not accept losing a vote - ever. hence why they are described as extremists ( i am right no matter what)

kek.
I think ppl wanna soft poll dems now so they can decide their 2020 candidate ahead of time.
This is "Never Trump... Again" phase 1, i bet

theyre going to line up behind Kristen Gillibrand.

>I dont know what liberal means, the post.

god how much did everyone fucking hate hillary lol

Cuck

No trump would have won both electoral and popular vote

The riots and retarded banter from celebrities are just ensuring a trump 2020 victory

For Bernie fans, she wouldn't be bad, but her campaign would have to be careful about falling into the same traps Clinton's did. They can't have supporters chanting for a woman president just to have a woman president, or Trump will eviscerate them.

enough to elect donald trump.

it's more that hillary didnt effectively prosecute any plan to help people left behind in the recovery from the recession. she tried to run for obama's third term, except she isnt him.

for sure. about 2 years into trump, when the riots are less and people have some results to judge on, i think even dems will wonder if "staying the course" for a little while (even if they disagree with it) is a better idea than swinging that fucking pendulum WAYYYYY back immediately.
If in 4 years ppl are still rioting the way they are now, the left will vote in larger numbers, and will go for anyone even if they hate them.

Well both she and Trump had about a tie in an approval rating below 50%. The worst part is, that one of them got into office.

No, you're falling for the sweet talk and speeches of politicians.

You care about your friends. About your family. You want the best for them. Why would a politician want the same? Do you really think when he's atop of government he will think of everyone, or just about what gives him more power?

Politicians are a problem. The existence of government is the greatest problem.

in 4 years, a huge chunk of the voters won't remember more than 2 or 3 big events, my guess is nothing right now matters, even though they're really angsty over it

he'll be dead b4 2020

i agree with you. However, I often wonder if they could persuade more ppl about identity politics if they double down and be "trump" blunt about it. Seems like they might go that route, looking at how left media is handling this loss.

the reason Hilary lost was almost entirely because everyone could see she was a corporate puppet and there was so much controversy about her, Sanders would have had to be fought with Politics alone which makes him much harder to beat, I think he would have claimed 53-57%% of colleges and won tbh,

the pinnacle of intellectual debate

The republicans under Obama showed that biding your time isn't necessarily bad. Obama got a lot of what he wanted, but not nearly close to all he wanted, because republicans refused to touch anything with his name associated with it, then when the election came around for Obama 2: Clinton boogaloo, their message was basically "all the bad shit is only democrats' fault, not us", and they won in huge numbers, even getting their orangutan presidential candidate. If Trump ends up with terrible policies in his term, and the democrats have been too scared/principled to vote with him on anything, then next time all the shoes will be on all the other feet.

liberal used to mean all people. now it means love POPULAR PROAGANDA. E.G. LOVE MUSLIMS BUT FUCK AFRICAN PEOPLE. FUCK POOR WHITE PEOPLE

"let's try something new" has a really nice ring to it in a place as creative as america. somehow first woman was just too damn boring and predictable. Also she seemed like a total cunt XD

No.

does bernie have a private email server

Is that why we see people saying they are libertarian and not liberal???

Any other Democrat could have run against trump and we would have known the election results by 9pm.

such a concluded mind.
What's your solution (short term)?

I dislike government as it is today, but you think it would be great if it was just corporations that control everything? (They already control the government). If you think that then you're just delusional.

kek. But what DO the memes have to say about this?

yea people use those two terms completely differently now. I'm not sure liberal is a term people are eager to describe themselves with? Am I wrong?

Probably not as most of his supporters were around 14. He's like the left's Rand/Ron Paul.

They definitely need to temper their idea of winning by taking the high road. Of course, they shouldn't do stupid shit and open themselves up to future criticism, but they should just politely oppose everything Trump does poorly, then be much more offensive during the next elections (especially mid-terms) than they were this time. Trump is the master shit-flinger, so they can't beat him purely on that, but can win if they have a solid and directed message, which Clinton lacked. Bernie mostly had one, and I feel that if he got the nomination his campaign would've shaped it into a really good one.

On the other hand, democrats have to be willing to cut the dead weight. Identity politics has to go, as do the old establishment fucks in the party. Trump ran on a message based on social and economic angst. The dems need to run based on a mirror image: painting corporate greed and political-corporate corruption as the major economic problems instead of Trump's very simplistic "liberal politicians fucked it all up" approach, and reinvent identity politics through the lens of class struggle, with a message tying it to the aforementioned economic issues.

If they really want to, they can crush republicans with this, but they're currently too old school to serious try it.

Word.
The bipartisan system is utter bullshit. I'd love to see a ballot with a couple dozen options, no party affiliations, and no candidates favored by debates and media.
But this system is easier to control and exploit, so positive change isn't likely.

Perhaps their idea of the "high road" is to actually move towards a version of identity politics that includes majorities, instead of just majorities.
The creation of a non-negative, left leaning white identity. What do you think?

Tired of the parties raping them so they vote for someone that ends up raping them anyways as well as pissing off the rest of the world in his first two weeks alone. Wow, what a good trade off.

Hard to say. It would've been tough for the Burn to explain how he's gonna redistribute the wealth back to the middle class while still being a millionaire. Trump flaunted his money to prove he was successful and it worked, ironically enough, among black people. To Bernie, being wealthy would have been a liability.

*includes majorities, instead of just minorities

well he lost....
so evidently no it would seem.

i didn't research this laboriously, but i googled him and it said he was worth around 500k. how is he a millionaire?

We can work towards a system like that, though.

We can start by convincing cities, counties, and smaller municipal governments to switch to ranked voting systems (see here for a straightforward explanation: youtube.com/watch?v=l8XOZJkozfI)

Once they've gone through a few successful elections that way and the periphery of the mainstream media has written "exotic and interesting" pieces on their new and different election methods, then we could start pushing for it to be adopted by more progressive states for legislature and even governor elections. Once they've had a few rounds of success, it could be seriously touted as a replacement/improvement for federal positions.

It wouldn't be overnight, or even over the course of a single 8 year administration, but it's definitely possible. 25 years ago people laughed at the idea of legalizing gay marriage nationwide, yet here we are today. Marijuana is on a similar path, even now. This method works, if you're willing to commit to playing the long game.

This. I know a ton of Bernie supports who hated Hillary and didn't bother to vote at all. Trump supporters would brave a hurricane to vote for the guy.

Privatize most things.

I don't defend corporations, I defend the free market. There's a difference there. I defend that if you wish you may do anything you want with your life, as long as you don't harm anyone or their property.

not him but I think unions should be much stronger and everyone should have a good union. Then we could combat corporate greed with strikes and boycotts etc. That way we could cut back on regulations but still hold them accountable

>Trump
>successful"

look up what senators make, and realize they can legally buy and sell stock based on non-public information about new policies and regulations the senate is discussing.

thats not even him, he was in a completely different state when that was taken

Screenshot this. They will run Tim Kaine in 2020.

>libertarians would have voted for a high-regulation, high-taxes, BLM/SJW thought-police supporting socialist
Lol this fucking guy
Bernie was an even less libertarian candidate than Hillary.
It had to be either Rand, Trump or Cruz, everyone else can eat shit.

Cory Booker

I don't know. I would have liked to see Bernie vs Trump, though. It would have been a much better race than it was.

dude that's clearly him. fuck off CTR shill.

General Public: "oh yea i've heard of him"

Eh, still don't believe you.

thisand Kristen Gillibrand.

maybe that new hot lady from hawaii or wherever who was the first congressperson to endorse bernie.

snopes.com/bernie-sanders-audi-8/

Look at the pension he'd get if he retired. Granted, "millionaire" may be an exaggeration, but he's definitely richer than your average working joe by miles.

>couldn't beat his own party
>finished with about 42% after the DNC set the whole primary against him

>The creation of a non-negative, left leaning white identity. What do you think?
It may be theoretically possible, but I'm very doubtful for its success.

The problem is that minorities, by definition of being a minority, have a unique label/culture associated with them, and because they've typically been mistreated by the majority (if not currently, at least in living memory), it's much easier to sell identity politics to them, because you wrap it as being uplifting and evening the playing field.

White people very rarely define themselves or other white people based on race, like minorities do. Minorities are almost forced to because that's how the majority defines them. But the majority defines itself based on other divisions: class, wealth, rural vs. urban, previous generation vs. new one, etc.

So I really think that if you want a successful form of identity politics that includes white people (majority) and minorities, you need to make it about a shared identity between them, not focused on just a white-related aspect. This is the motivation behind things like the 99% idea, which I think would be a good starting point for a potential movement like this.

Additionally, left-leaning whites are very much associated with helping and supporting (often but not always left-leaning) non-whites, so it's almost antithetical to the "liberal" or "left" aspects of "left learning white identity".

You're a fucking retard.

Never said Trump is successful; said he used his money to appear successful. And for a lot of voters, it worked.

Here's the sad truth: hate trumps love. Love doesn't bring people together like mutual hatred does. That's the way people are. If we have a choice between a candidate preaching love and tolerance and a candidate telling us there are evil, scary men that want to kill you and your family, and he's gonna go over and fuck them in the ass, the second guy's gonna win 9 times out of 10.

It's fucked up, and I don't know what that says about human nature, but it's the honest truth.

A lot of democratic partisan line towing journalists have been calling him "a phoenix from the ashes"

The DNC wants a neoliberal corporatist who has been in the public eye. He doesn't have the Clinton-level baggage. He will appeal to the morons who actually like HRC, while not having nearly as much dirt on him.

Also, nice dubs fam.

>snopes
>credible
pick one.

lol how's soros' dick taste?

checked