Patterico's Pontifications

2/14/2020

Comrade Sanders Gently Sets Down the Gauntlet

Filed under: General — JVW @ 3:18 pm



[guest post by JVW]

Senator Bernard Sanders of Vermont is now the betting favorite to win the nomination as the Democrat candidate for President of the United States, though former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg has attracted a great deal of attention from the oddsmakers and is a strong second. (Fun fact: a bookmaking site called betfair Exchange will at this moment give you 24:1 odds if you want to put money down on Hillary Clinton, but you can get astounding 68:1 odds if you want to throw away your money betting on Elizabeth Warren.) In the past few days since New Hampshire we have been following the probabilities posted at FiveThirtyEight.com as to whether or not a Dem candidate will have mustered enough delegates by the time the party convention opens to win the nomination on a first ballot. Right now the site’s green eyeshade guys calculate that there is a 38% chance that no candidate will arrive in Milwaukee with a delegate majority, which exceeds the 35% probability that Comrade Bernard will accomplish the feat (rest of the field so you don’t have to click on the link: Biden 14%, Bloomberg 7%, Buttigieg 4%, Warren 2%, rest of field 0.2% ).

So a really interesting question becomes whether it’s possible that Senator Stalin arrives at the convention with a plurality — but not a majority — of delegates, and the party manages to block his candidacy by ensuring that a candidate who actually registers as a Democrat in non-Presidential election years unifies the rest of the delegates in his or her favor. Appearing on MSNBC (naturally) the other night, the elderly Marxist was asked about this scenario. Rather than declaring blood in the streets, however, he laid down a pretty mild preemptory protestation to the party’s potential for punking his people:

I sort of get where he is coming from, but I can’t help but find it funny that the same people who think that Hillary Clinton is the rightful President because she won the popular vote apparently also believe that a plurality of delegates is just as valid as a majority. If Bernard Sanders is the leading delegate holder at the convention but lacks a majority then it’s really up to him to win over some delegates from his rivals, even if that means having to trim back his allegiance to the magnificent benevolence of socialism, even if that hurts the feelings of our adorably clueless Sandersista niece. If the professional Democrats burn the Bern feelers by conspiring to throw the nomination to one of the other remaining candidates or to a compromise candidate, then maybe Bernard Sanders can reflect upon the folly of expecting to build his sandcastles in someone else’s sandbox.

– JVW

42 Responses to “Comrade Sanders Gently Sets Down the Gauntlet”

  1. I suppose the Senator can claim that he thinks a plurality lead by any candidate ought to be enough to win the nomination, but I’m sure he’s shrewd enough to realize that the Democrat vote seems to be dividing into pro-Bernie and NeverBernie factions, just as the GOP primary did four years ago. He certainly understands that if the arrives in Milwaukee with, say, 40% of the delegates (and let’s assume that Warren and Steyer between them have less than 5%) then the remaining 55+% divided among Biden, Buttigieg, and Klobuchar is going to get together to prevent the party from going all-in on socialism, right? In fact, this is probably how you get a Buttigieg-Klobuchar or Klobuchar-Buttigieg ticket.

    JVW (54fd0b)

  2. Sinn Fein might tell Bernie to hold their Guiness for them (pardon the source): http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-02-14/sinn-fein-to-be-edged-out-of-power-by-grand-coalition-odds-say

    urbanleftbehind (f805b3)

  3. I peeked in to see where Her Heinous Obama was in the standing. If it comes down to the wire at the convention I dunno

    Ragspierre (d9bec9)

  4. Warren being less likely than Hillary has gotta sting.

    I guess DCSCA was right about Bloomberg being a dark horse.

    Dustin (b8d6d1)

  5. makes me think mittens is in the wrong sandbox

    mg (8cbc69)

  6. Ding
    deblazzzzio is backing breadline burnee

    mg (8cbc69)

  7. I won’t be getting my mail-in ballot for a couple more weeks. That’s how long Bernie has to convince me that he can beat Trump.

    nk (9651fb)

  8. Go with Conway in that one other race of interest.

    urbanleftbehind (2641dd)

  9. Dem establishment did roughly that in 2016, and he did nothing. Don’t see much that’s changed. Perhaps the Communist swill whine and mewl if that happens. But Sanders is 172, and controlling the Democratic Party machinery once the current junta of oldsters age out means they’ll take a beating in 2020 to take over completely thereafter.

    Deblasio is a Mush; as close as you can come to a kiss of death.

    Bugg (ebf485)

  10. burnee will need you in Milwaukee to burn down the house, nk.

    mg (8cbc69)

  11. Bernie Bros, Antifa and Trump Army are gonna meet up in Milwaukee like the 2 sets of bad guys in the 2nd and 3rd Die Hards.

    urbanleftbehind (eb251a)

  12. the light bringer of free stuff will not attract any Trump voters

    mg (8cbc69)

  13. what are diehards?

    mg (8cbc69)

  14. Hubert Humphrey won in 1968 after losing every primary but winning all the backroom votes. This caused some friction.

    Kevin M (ab1c11)

  15. if the commies have no one going into Milwuakee
    draft Kelly

    mg (8cbc69)

  16. I’m hoping for a 57 ballot extravaganza.

    Kevin M (ab1c11)

  17. The movies Die Hard 2 and Die Hard 3. Both are notable for having scenes were either fake good guys met up with bad guys or 2 distinct bad guys met up to celebrate the apparent success of their plot only for jon McClain to figure it out in the nick if time.

    urbanleftbehind (eb251a)

  18. what are diehards?

    Batteries with little bunnies inside.

    Great glory…

    Ragspierre (d9bec9)

  19. Will they resurrect Pigasus from 68 Chicago?

    mg (8cbc69)

  20. If Bernie intends to lead the Dems, he needs to do it instead of whining about how other people might thwart him. Booohooo booohoooo, 4 other people might get together and combine their delegates to beat me because I can’t manager to ally with one other person. Booo hooooo.

    Nic (896fdf)

  21. Bernie is entertaining but he’s another heart attack in the making; he will never get the nomination.

    Beware: Bloomberg. Biden will drop out in six weeks; Liz, Amy and Tom-Tom, too. Mayor Pete is the charming Veep Vet; the ticket-topper: Little Big Mike.

    He will lose to Trump. More interesting Vegas betting lines; who will assume room temperature first: heart-attack Bernie; Junk Food Donald– or the winded-Rushbo.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  22. If Bernie intends to lead the Dems, he needs to do it instead of whining about how other people might thwart him. Booohooo booohoooo, 4 other people might get together and combine their delegates to beat me because I can’t manager to ally with one other person. Booo hooooo.

    Nic (896fdf) — 2/14/2020 @ 7:18 pm

    Obama he ain’t.

    the ticket-topper: Little Big Mike.

    Jeez. Does he go left or does he go right? I think he’s smart enough to try to go to the middle and hope Trump fervor gets the left to vote for him.

    A Bloomberg Romney ticket would be hilarious.

    Dustin (b8d6d1)

  23. @24. Little Big Mike’s is weakest when he’s himself.

    The charisma of a head cold; the charm of a snake bite; the voice of a teen with his winkie caught in his zipper. About as inspiring as a transfer to a field office in Bartlesville, Oklahoma.

    He is the genuine autocrat; not stumble-bum Trump. Gather ye Big Gulps while ye may…

    Beware: Bloomberg.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  24. 26. On the other hand, I think you could make a pretty good argument that Bloomberg isn’t really interested in the early pissing matches. My boss and I were discussing a scenario in which Bloomberg runs away with the nomination after Super Tuesday, which is an outcome I certainly wouldn’t mind seeing. A self-made New York billionaire versus Trump. You could put those debates on pay-per-view!

    Gryph (08c844)

  25. T-rump realists don’t live in a nightmare. We walk in the bright upland of conscience informed by realism and critical thought.

    The T-rump sucking cultists include outright bigots who have seared their consciences and forgotten what it means to be an American. If ever they knew.

    Ragspierre (d9bec9)

  26. Oh, yeah, Ragspiere? Just wait until Bloomberg/Omar outlaw guns, sugar, alcohol, and dogs, with their Article II power. Then what will you do?

    nk (9651fb)

  27. Shoot my dog and eat him with a nice sugar rub in a drunken fit? Hell, I really hadn’t given it much thought. I thought this was supposed to be the Bernie nightmare.

    I can’t keep up…

    Ragspierre (d9bec9)

  28. @ JVW:

    I kind help but find it funny that the same people who think that Hillary Clinton is the rightful President because she won the popular vote apparently also believe that a plurality of delegates is just as valid as a majority.

    Sorry, but I don’t see the inconsistency here. After all, Hillary may have finished first in the popular vote, but she didn’t get a majority (she beat Trump 48.2% to 46.1%). If Bernie manages to finish first in the delegate count but doesn’t have a majority, I think an extension of that reasoning would seem to logically follow.

    Now, I think the reasoning is wrong in both cases. But it is consistent.

    Demosthenes (7fae81)

  29. 31. That is exactly why all the weeping and gnashing of teeth among Democrats makes no sense to me. If you can win the presidency on a plurality, why shouldn’t you be able to take the nomination on one as well?

    Gryph (08c844)

  30. This is the nightmare scenario for NeverTrumpers: not even having the fig leaf of pretense that the Democrat they voted for is a “moderate”.

    BorisB (607abb) — 2/14/2020 @ 11:58 pm

    Why do you Trump supporters get so huffy about the potential insidious evil of a former republican supporting a democrat if you’re voting for Trump, a lifelong democrat who couldn’t get enough of Clinton, Epstein, Pelosi, Weiner, Schumer and lavished all kinds of nice things on his democrat pals for decades. He raised money for planned parenthood, argued for gun bans, condemned Romney for being too conservative on immigration, wanted universal healthcare, and clearly has contempt for our military.

    Sometimes I get the feeling you guys are doing that gaslighting thing. You’re silently kinda sad that you are worshiping a new york liberal so you spend all day shouting about how bad that would be… to people who just want a balanced budget and a humble government.

    Dustin (b8d6d1)

  31. @ BorisB, #26:

    I voted for Gary Johnson in 2016…not Clinton, and not Trump. If the Libertarian nominee in 2020 is even halfway sane, I will vote for them…not Trump, and not whichever wackadoodle wins the Democratic nomination. If they’re not halfway sane, I’ll just skip that part of my ballot, and move on down to the Senate and House races.

    Not every choice in life is binary.

    Demosthenes (7fae81)

  32. Demosthenes is right, of course. And it’s not like we would be doing cartwheels if Bloomberg were the next president. It is a shame the GOP has fallen so far that Trump’s die hard fans are this worried about lifelong republicans supporting a nutjob socialist. That’s not something they should take any pride in.

    Dustin (b8d6d1)

  33. BorisB,

    Are you an American and, if so, are you living abroad? It doesn’t matter. Your views are welcome, of course, but I am curious. You sometimes say things that strike me as foreign.

    DRJ (15874d)

  34. The threshold question for me in 2016 was not about politics. Far upstream of that was “Is either of these people fit for office?” Neither met the test. No need for further analysis.

    I’ve never voted for a Deemocrat for national or even state office in several decades of voting. I won’t be voting for one any time in the future that I can imagine.

    Ragspierre (d9bec9)

  35. “If you are part of a society that votes, then do so. There may be no candidates and no measures you want to vote for … but there are certain to be ones you want to vote against. In case of doubt, vote against. By this rule you will rarely go wrong.”

    –Robert Heinlein

    Of course, it’s hard to vote against all of them.

    Kevin M (ab1c11)

  36. Now, I think the reasoning is wrong in both cases. But it is consistent.

    Yes, I know. I didn’t mean to imply that they were being inconsistent, my point really is that these people seem to think the rules are to be arbitrarily rewritten to produce the outcome they desire.

    JVW (54fd0b)

  37. DNC and democrat establishment are desperate to stop bernie sanders. They hate trump ;but can tolerate him. Sanders might raise taxes on rich donor class so must be stopped at all cost even if it means trump’s re-election. If bernie is cheated out of nomination AOC walks into presidency in 2024 when minorities will be nearly 40% of electorate. By 2024 arizona will have become a blue state and texas will have turned purple. (half the babies born in arizona and texas are minorities)

    asset (b56ce3)

  38. Asset, the blueing and purpling would have happened sooner had a wall been built in the late 2000s as directed by congressional vote…we’d be hearing the kvetching from the Cajun Navy instead of from ranchers.

    urbanleftbehind (c23245)

  39. I sort of get where he is coming from, but I can’t help but find it funny that the same people who think that Hillary Clinton is the rightful President because she won the popular vote apparently also believe that a plurality of delegates is just as valid as a majority.

    Perfectly understandable, when your only real principle is “whatever gets me into power,” and everything else is just a convenient facade for the moment.

    In 2000, there was a serious belief that Gore would win the Electoral College but lose the popular vote. So the Dems geared up to argue how crucially important the EC is. Then when things turned out different, they shifted arguments.

    Bored Lawyer (56c962)

  40. 33. Dustin (b8d6d1) — 2/15/2020 @ 7:41 am

    Trump, a lifelong democrat

    Trump was only a Democrat from 2001 to 209 (when Bush 43, a Republican, was president)

    He contributed plenty to Democrats though, until 2011 or 2012.

    He was a lifelong Republican (or at least since 1987) until 1999 when he was thinking or planning of going after the Reform (Ross Pert) party nomination.

    Sammy Finkelman (8e96a4)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.4583 secs.