Nobody wants to see or hear from Hillary Clinton. It is hard to run for President like that, regardless of the Democratic Party's nod that it is her turn. They decided that is was John Kerry's turn and we got four more years of Bush.
The Democratic Party is showing its true colors in their handling of Sanders and their ridiculous debate schedule.
By all measures, Sanders is a REAL candidate. He's got more support and more money than most of the jokers on the Republican side who are getting respectful treatment from their party and the press.
Yet Debbie Wasserman Schultz and other party insiders are doing their best to exclude the IA/NH front-runner from getting his message out to Democratic voters.
> He's got more support and more money than most of the jokers on the Republican side who are getting respectful treatment from their party and the press.
This doesn't mean much in itself. He's one of three candidates, compared to ~15 Republican candidates. It's almost mathematically certain that two of the three Democratic candidates will have more support that 'most of' the Republicans, regardless of their ideology.
It would be meaningful if he didn't have that level of support, given that there are only two other choices (and that practically nobody has even heard of one of the other two).
The Democratic Party has (recently) come to value unity and party discipline (A.K.A. loyalty). The Republicans have lost unity and discipline over the past 10+ years. You can see this from how Democratic Party leaders critize their counterparts for failing to keep members 'in line', whereas the opposite (Rs criticizing Ds for lack of discipline) is rarely the case.
This treatment of non-establishment (or non-conformist) politicians (Sanders being one case) is just a symptom of this medium-term trend.
Sanders is leading in NH, but is in a distant second in IA and nationally [1]. Unfortunately most of these polls include a hypothetical Biden run. Its not clear how much of his support would go to Clinton, but I assume at least half, given they are both establishment candidates.
6 comments
[ 4.1 ms ] story [ 27.8 ms ] threadBy all measures, Sanders is a REAL candidate. He's got more support and more money than most of the jokers on the Republican side who are getting respectful treatment from their party and the press.
Yet Debbie Wasserman Schultz and other party insiders are doing their best to exclude the IA/NH front-runner from getting his message out to Democratic voters.
This doesn't mean much in itself. He's one of three candidates, compared to ~15 Republican candidates. It's almost mathematically certain that two of the three Democratic candidates will have more support that 'most of' the Republicans, regardless of their ideology.
It would be meaningful if he didn't have that level of support, given that there are only two other choices (and that practically nobody has even heard of one of the other two).
Pretty sure that's six declared candidates: Clinton, Sanders, O'Malley, Chaffee, Webb and Lessig.
This treatment of non-establishment (or non-conformist) politicians (Sanders being one case) is just a symptom of this medium-term trend.
[1] http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/latest_polls/electio...