• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
  • The Politics forum has been nuked. Please do not bring political discussion to the rest of the site, or you will be removed. Thanks.

1 In 10 Sanders Primary Voters Ended Up Supporting Trump

Status
Not open for further replies.

jtb

Banned
Jun 20, 2009
19,674
1
0
NYC
Okay, the Yale stuff seems more interesting, and doesn't put so much faith in just its model.

Still, it's very hard to get good data and reconcile Obama's giant victory with such massive defections from a candidate that essentially tied him in primary voting.

Not really. The GOP was at rock bottom in 2008, coming off back to back wave elections ushering George W. Bush out of office. Dems picked up plenty of House seats and Senate seats in districts and states that Obama did not win.

The House Dems outperformed Obama in the 2008 election. Couple that with the primary electorate being a very small portion of general election electorate, and it becomes a lot more palatable.
 

Audioboxer

Member
May 11, 2010
21,939
11
820
UK
the reason it's still happening is because it's necessary for us to understand why we failed if we want to succeed going forward. to the left, the party failed because it was too far right. to the center, the party failed because leftists poisoned the well and refused to vote against fascism. some people think that clinton was just uniquely flawed or unsuited to be a candidate for the kind of race that it turned out to be and dems can win again without changing anything.

my personal read is that democrats have been trying to win over the mythical moderate for the last 30 years and their base is deserting them in increasing numbers because those kinds of politics are not good for them. i also think they will completely fail to learn this lesson and even if they manage to somehow retake the senate and/or the presidency they will continue to govern from the center and further disenchant people who want real left wing policies until the republicans take over again and the democrats implode from lack of popular support.

in 20 years the party will either be further left or non-existent. or we'll all be dead. imo.

You might be right, I am a bit useless arguing anything with confidence around American politics. As an outsider the extent of the inner workings to your country right now is usually just Trump constantly making worldwide headlines for doing stupid shit. I'm sure though you can understand why it appears a bit worrying to an outsider why some of you are still reliving 2016 when it's nearly 2018.

Most left parties around the world are really centre-left overall, with individual things being further left depending on what they are. The biggest thing that is terrible for a country like America is there not being a national health service. As a Brit we might be fighting tooth and nail to try and stop our Conservative Government privitising ours, but you guys should be trying to fight to get away from what you have.

It's utterly depressing as an outsider to see the amount of resistance by the people to a national health service. IIRC Bernie Sanders said a lot of good things about healthcare. However, as I just said it's the outrageous amount of American people who oppose a health service like most of Europe which is one hell of a hurdle before you even move onto big pharma and your Government resisting it too. So I would say get a Dem candidate out there with healthcare as a main issue... but as things stand that would probably backfire considering the amount of hate Obama seemed to get for healthcare from his own party! Why do you guys hate the idea of a national health service so badly? lol
 

El_Tiguere

Member
Sep 7, 2016
550
0
245
Jesus Christ just move to Venezuela then. Capitalism got the USA to where it is today. Do we have problems in society today? Of course. But destroying capitalism isn't the solution.

Nobody is arguing for Venezuela. What is wrong to ask a government to favor workers and regular Americans for a change? we had a damn corporate coup d'etat in the 1970s and we are all now paying the price (literally with wages stagnant since the 1970s).

What the fuck is defensible about our current path as a country under an oligarchy? good TV shows to cope with worker insecurity?
 

Neoweee

Member
Oct 8, 2014
4,739
0
415
Not really. The GOP was at rock bottom in 2008, coming off back to back wave elections ushering George W. Bush out of office. Dems picked up plenty of House seats and Senate seats in districts and states that Obama did not win.

The House Dems outperformed Obama in the 2008 election. Couple that with the primary electorate being a very small portion of general election electorate, and it becomes a lot more palatable.

Okay, wow, I thought the 2008 House was a bit closer than it really was. I thought it was under 10%, but, nope, almost 11.
 

JP_

Banned
Nov 7, 2015
3,062
0
0
armsoftelos.com
Okay, the Yale stuff seems more interesting, and doesn't put so much faith in just its model.

Still, it's very hard to get good data and reconcile Obama's giant victory with such massive defections from a candidate that essentially tied him in primary voting.
...primaries are smaller than GE by a large margin.
 
Aug 22, 2014
21,195
2
0
More proof that Bernie Sanders would have won.

Accurate if you assume Hillary supporters were more reasonable in being willing to vote for the greatest oppositon to Trump. So you're basically throwing Bernie supporters under the bus with your comment.
 

aeolist

Banned
Oct 31, 2006
17,538
0
0
Accurate if you assume Hillary supporters were more reasonable in being willing to vote for the greatest oppositon to Trump. So you're basically throwing Bernie supporters under the bus with your comment.

i agree that hillary voters are as a whole shittier than bernie supporters and he would not have won
 

rjinaz

Member
Feb 7, 2012
17,934
2
700
38
Jesus Christ just move to Venezuela then. Capitalism got the USA to where it is today. Do we have problems in society today? Of course. But destroying capitalism isn't the solution.

Should we not adjust with current times? I'm not going to argue that capitalism didn't got us where we are today, but why must we assume that capitalism is always going to be the answer? There was a time when British Monarchy did quite well for them. They became the most powerful nation in the world. Should we have adopted Monarchy then? Times change. What works for one era may not work for another. Venezuela is the easy option to point to, but there are plenty of societies that have adopted more socialistic approaches that are doing quite well. America is falling behind in terms of social policies. But hey, the rich keep getting richer so YAY!
 

Ekai

Member
May 23, 2015
4,702
0
0
This doesn't at all fit with other statistics released earlier on but whatever fits the narrative that people who supported Bernie in the primary are evil,I guess. Especially given attitudes earlier on in this thread that we're akin to Satan for having done so.

This isn't what Democrats need right now but if you people want to reignite the primary that's on you. I'm tired of this nonsense.

Also wasn't primary reigniting a bannable offense a while back? Or does that only apply to specific people now?
 

kamineko

Does his best thinking in the flying car
Oct 7, 2014
5,245
2
435
I stayed home

I did, however, use the phrase "neoliberal shill" at least 72 times a day in the months leading up to the election

Though I can't see any positive results yet, I'm certain that I've helped America a great deal

/s
 
Aug 10, 2009
4,960
1
0
It's not really Bernie's fault that Clinton was a terrible candidate and couldn't pick up his base properly, but also these voters are fking idiots.

Unfortunately it is his fault for not campaigning better during the primary to actually pull off the win.
 

g11

Member
Jun 17, 2014
1,184
0
0
Should we not adjust with current times? I'm not going to argue that capitalism didn't got us where we are today, but why must we assume that capitalism is always going to be the answer? There was a time when British Monarchy did quite well for them. They became the most powerful nation in the world. Should we have adopted Monarchy then? Times change. What works for one era may not work for another. Venezuela is the easy option to point to, but there are plenty of societies that have adopted more socialistic approaches that are doing quite well. America is falling behind in terms of social policies. But hey, the rich keep getting richer so YAY!

Any country you can name that is "more socialist" than the U.S. but still "doing quite well" are still majority capitalist. Just like socialism isn't the boogeyman it was made out to be by American leaders in the 50s, capitalism isn't the boogeyman some would have you believe it is today. Extremist capitalism (U.S.) is bad in pretty much exactly the same way that extremist socialism (North Korea) is bad. They both funnel money to the few at the top while the majority sacrifice and suffer. China didn't become an economic powerhouse by becoming more communist. Exactly the opposite in fact. Oh and for the record, Britain didn't become a superpower because of the monarchy, they did it by Imperialism and naval power. That's like saying Nazism is superior because their scientists were integral to both the U.S. and Soviet nuclear programs.
 

HiredN00bs

Member
Sep 22, 2010
6,096
1
595
Laurel, MD
www.twitter.com
At first glance this is shameful, but it might indicate that Bernie's message appeals to more than just progressives and Democrats.

I myself was a registered Republican, then unaffiliated, and finally registered as a Democrat so I could vote for Bernie.
 

rjinaz

Member
Feb 7, 2012
17,934
2
700
38
Any country you can name that is "more socialist" than the U.S. but still "doing quite well" are still majority capitalist. Just like socialism isn't the boogeyman it was made out to be by American leaders in the 50s, capitalism isn't the boogeyman some would have you believe it is today. Extremist capitalism (U.S.) is bad in pretty much exactly the same way that extremist socialism (North Korea) is bad. They both funnel money to the few at the top while the majority sacrifice and suffer. China didn't become an economic powerhouse by becoming more communist. Exactly the opposite in fact. Oh and for the record, Britain didn't become a superpower because of the monarchy, they did it by Imperialism and naval power. That's like saying Nazism is superior because their scientists were integral to both the U.S. and Soviet nuclear programs.

That's fair. I won't argue that we need to get rid of capitalism completely, but socialism or any aspect thereof is hardly the boogeyman the GOP would have you believe it is. it's in their best interest for the American people to believe so.

Nonetheless they succeeded under Monarchy. The poster I was referring to referenced Venezuela as if that was the end all of socialism. Also the Nazis kind of prove the point I was making. There are lots of different ways to be successful as a nation as history has proven that don't necessarily involve capitalism so it's not sound that nothing else could work and should be dismissed without critical thought.
 

Horns

I drop hot takes hoping you'll argue with me. Just ignore me.
Jun 23, 2010
4,592
896
1,075
Sickening. It really is.
 
Aug 17, 2006
7,687
0
1,055
Plus the insane demonization of her by the GOP for decades.

I agree with this. We need to stop blaming each other and unite as a single entity against Trump and is I'll, or we'll be destroyed again.

.

And once we finally fucking unite, then we can slowly start lifting that "us vs them" behavior on Trump Supporters who regret their decision.

In the short term, hold off on the insults of their racist or bigoted or <common Trump supporter insult> and encourage those who believe they've made a mistake to rectify it by voting for someone else. Once they've voted away from Trump or whatever monstrosity the GOP presents, then you can lay into them all you want.

The worst thing is this "only 2 sides" shit which could move conservative moderates into not voting for a dem candidate or not voting at all. I've heard many stories of ppl voting simply to spite others and that's a fucking loss to us.

"Sides" only helps Repubs because they are better at politicking so working against that by NOT painting a broad stroke against former Trump Supporters is going to be a key in a lot of swing states.

Note that this won't apply to an actual Trump dieharder. Anything Trump does they'll praise and they're not worth wasting any energy on at all.
 

phanphare

Banned
Aug 21, 2013
22,647
4
415
huh, lower than I would have thought tbh given past elections and the fact that bernie was an independent before joining the dems to run and appealed to a lot of independent voters

I guess he did a good job of getting his supporters over to clinton
 
Nov 14, 2010
1,879
0
670
At first glance this is shameful, but it might indicate that Bernie's message appeals to more than just progressives and Democrats.

I myself was a registered Republican, then unaffiliated, and finally registered as a Democrat so I could vote for Bernie.

Yup!
 

shawnbuddy

Member
Jul 28, 2015
3,109
2
0
Bernie could not have won in a general election. He'd have lost miserably, just like he did in the primary.
 

BoogieWoogie

Banned
Jun 16, 2015
5,831
0
0
 

El_Tiguere

Member
Sep 7, 2016
550
0
245
At first glance this is shameful, but it might indicate that Bernie's message appeals to more than just progressives and Democrats.

I myself was a registered Republican, then unaffiliated, and finally registered as a Democrat so I could vote for Bernie.

DING! DING! DING! Pretty much...
 

Toparaman

Banned
Feb 20, 2013
6,128
23
600
Bernie could have done more to get them to transfer his votes to Hillary if he hadn't dodged supporting her outright until the last moment and even then was uncommitted about it. It wasn't the sole reason, but his inability to accept defeat months before when it was a mathematical certainty did damage. He was more concerned about keeping the high of all the attention he was getting.

He vocally and enthusiastically campaigned for her as soon as she was nominated.
 

Mutant

Member
Jan 26, 2016
771
2
290
At first glance this is shameful, but it might indicate that Bernie's message appeals to more than just progressives and Democrats.

I myself was a registered Republican, then unaffiliated, and finally registered as a Democrat so I could vote for Bernie.

Yes the article goes on to say that it had to do with party.

Party seems to have had something to do with it &#8212; Sanders-Trump voters were much less likely than Sanders-Clinton or Sanders-third party voters to have been Democrats. Likewise, approval of President Barack Obama appears to be related &#8212; Sanders-Trump voters approved of Obama much less than other Sanders primary voters.

Sanders had crossover appeal with Republicans, he lost and then those Republicans voted for Trump. That's the large portion of your 1 in 10.
 

King Tubby

Member
Feb 22, 2013
5,999
0
385
This seems pretty standard for any election. I'm not sure really what insight can be gleaned from this.
 

Cocaloch

Member
Apr 16, 2013
3,789
0
0
Chicago
Oh and for the record, Britain didn't become a superpower because of the monarchy, they did it by Imperialism and naval power

Imperialism and naval dominance, only firmly establish after Trafalgar, are results of Britain's success, not the other way around. The Crown-in-Parliament quite possibly did play a role in this.


I'm ignoring your weird comparison to Nazis.
 

enzo_gt

tagged by Blackace
Jun 7, 2009
78,135
0
0
Damn, why are all the replies in this thread like proportion was 6 in 10, wtf? 1 in 10 is really low, and absurd to paint all Bernie supporters that way based on that small proportion.
 

Apathy

Member
Nov 24, 2013
12,472
1
0
gotta wonder who on here that are die hard bernie support are actually lying to us when they said they went and voted for clinton in the general elections just to not admit they voted trump like idiots.
 

BudokaiMR2

Member
Dec 18, 2005
11,063
0
0
Osaka
How many people are doing that in this thread? 1 in 25?

One point that I find interesting is how many people are coming in here to say "Oh wow I figured it would be way higher" which might say something about their attitude during the primaries on this forum and other places.

Not really trying to condemn people or anything, but maybe this is a good chance for some to evaluate how broadly they like to apply labels to people supporting someone they may have issues with.

Trump supporters can still get fucked tho.
 

Valhelm

contribute something
Sep 5, 2009
16,224
0
0
Miami
twitter.com
Jesus Christ just move to Venezuela then. Capitalism got the USA to where it is today. Do we have problems in society today? Of course. But destroying capitalism isn't the solution.

Venezuela has capitalism too!

And you need to recognize that the US got where it is today on the blood and labor of slaves and workers here and abroad. Capitalism, in 1850 and today, makes some people wealthy at the expense of others.

Why do you guys continue to relive the 2016 Democratic primary?

We're going to be reliving the 2016 primary for the next 50 years.
 

digdug2k

Member
Apr 11, 2014
1,940
0
0
Why are you blaming him? There are so many thing that Clinton could have done to win, had she done things differently. Obvious things too, that ex-presidents suggested for her. She didn't do it.

Why, out of all the reasons, do you attack her primary opponent, whose voters supported her by 90%??? Why? That is like the least significant reason she lost. If anything, you solution is to eliminate primary opponents which is a terrible way about this. We need to support Democracy, in which primary election are essential.
To be fair, this doesn't say that 90% of them supported her. It says 10% voted for Trump. Some stayed home. Some voted 3rd party. But I don't remember seeing anything to suggest those numbers were extraordinary either.

I'm still a bit mad at Bernie for running a "she's corrupt and takes bribes. OMG the Clinton Foundation!" campaign against Hillary. It was the campaign the GOP wanted to run, and Bernie endorsing it basically gave it credence in people's eyes. You still see people parrot that shit on here. But... ce' la vie. I think I'm a single issue voter at this point, and that issue is, get the nazis out of our government.
 

Shake Appeal

Member
Oct 26, 2006
17,547
0
0
So fewer Bernie primary voters flipped party in 2016 than Hillary primary voters in 2008, but the lede and presentation of this info is... right, gotcha.
 

Tye The Czar

Member
May 1, 2013
3,147
1
0
Thanks, guys!

Guess we can't just blame them, since enough others voted Trump. But going from Sanders to Trump seems like such a strange leap.

Makes sense. They wanted an anti-establishment politician, scandals be damned, but the Democratic Party went for the most establishment one.
 

Koomaster

Member
Oct 12, 2005
8,987
0
0
39
Va.
So fewer Bernie primary voters flipped party in 2016 than Hillary primary voters in 2008, but the lede and presentation of this info is... right, gotcha.
Is there evidence that the 2008 Hillary voters are the same 2016 Hillary voters? Or more likely the 2016 Hillary voters were 2008 Obama voters? How do we know the 2008 Hillary voters who flipped to McCain weren't 2016 Sanders supporters which would make more sense?
 

kirblar

Member
Oct 9, 2010
63,315
1
860
Why though? That's complete opposites
Not if they're social conservatives/economic liberals. Trump ran on that combination. (though he was lying his ass off about the economic liberalism.
So fewer Bernie primary voters flipped party in 2016 than Hillary primary voters in 2008, but the lede and presentation of this info is... right, gotcha.
Hillary '08 and '16 were very different campaigns with very different bases of support, and Hillary '08 was much closer to Sanders' campaign while Hillary '16 was closer to Obama '08.
 

ExVicis

Member
Jan 22, 2014
5,809
1
445
Near D.C.
Any country you can name that is "more socialist" than the U.S. but still "doing quite well" are still majority capitalist. Just like socialism isn't the boogeyman it was made out to be by American leaders in the 50s, capitalism isn't the boogeyman some would have you believe it is today. Extremist capitalism (U.S.) is bad in pretty much exactly the same way that extremist socialism (North Korea) is bad. They both funnel money to the few at the top while the majority sacrifice and suffer. China didn't become an economic powerhouse by becoming more communist. Exactly the opposite in fact. Oh and for the record, Britain didn't become a superpower because of the monarchy, they did it by Imperialism and naval power. That's like saying Nazism is superior because their scientists were integral to both the U.S. and Soviet nuclear programs.
How in the hell are you going to say N. Korea is extreme socalism when it has 0 democratization of the labour and the means of production and still uses money? That's completely incorrect and your attempt to make North Korea seem like it is any form of Socialist is incredibly wrong.


On the actual topic, I'm not surprised there is some Sanders-Trump overlap in voters but I mean the c'mon guys. The way people are posting in here seems really less like trying to learn from the past and more like the leftover bitter feelings from November and the leftover conflict of the "Berniebros v. Hilldawgs" fight. It's been how many months now? Let's just put this ridiculous animosity behind us already, goddamn.
 

GoldenEye 007

Member
Jul 28, 2006
23,805
0
0
The Big D
While the 2008 John McCain was a shitshow, he wasn't an outright white supremacist. Hell, he even tried to shut down dumb fuck GOP voters claiming Obama was a Muslim or not born here. That is unheard of in the modern GOP.

8 years later, the alternative to Clinton was an unabashed and out in the open white supremacist. So to still vote for that says a lot about those people.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.