Will Sanders stay in the race until June even if he wins no states (except VT)?

[ElectionsGuy]

If he doesn't win New Hampshire he'll drop out soon afterward.

[I support Sanders]

If he only wins Vermont and/or New Hampshire, he will be reasonable and suspend his campaign around April-May. If he does this, it will be interesting where his supporters go, especially since I don't believe Bernie will endorse Hillary. Hillary cannot win without Bernie's base, and I suspect a large number of us will defect to third parties, or even a decent Republican candidate like John Kasich, if only to send a message to the DNC that it is unacceptable for them to keep fielding us corporatist Democrats.

[Asian Nazi]

If he only wins Vermont and/or New Hampshire, he will be reasonable and suspend his campaign around April-May. If he does this, it will be interesting where his supporters go, especially since I don't believe Bernie will endorse Hillary. Hillary cannot win without Bernie's base, and I suspect a large number of us will defect to third parties, or even a decent Republican candidate like John Kasich, if only to send a message to the DNC that it is unacceptable for them to keep fielding us corporatist Democrats.

Someone should just re-post this piece of lunacy every time someone starts a Sanders thread.

[Skye]

Absolutely not.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

No, he's running to win, not to be some hopeless loser.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Some people support Sanders because of his Iraq war vote (and some of the Republican candidates were against Iraq from the get go as well)

Clinton, although she finally admitted her vote was a mistake, took a long while to come to this realization (just like many Democrats finally came around on SSM). So was the war a mistake or not? Seems like an important question, does it not?

For those supporting Sanders for this reason alone, how does that justify calling them nuts or some other ad hominem?
Most Democrats admit that Iraq was a mistake. Many Republicans do as well. "I didn't know any better" is a lame lame excuse for causing the deaths of thousands of innocent people.

Those who voted for Iraq failed to learn the lesson of Vietnam. To give the CIC a blank check to do whatever he pleased, especially the stupidest CIC that this country has ever had seems like something only a delusional child will do.
Sanders chances are slim right now, true, and I am not even supporting him yet, since by the time the PA primary comes around the hand writing may already be on the wall.
But his chances are irrelevant until the fat lady sings. There is no reason not to vote for him if he is your choice, regardless of how far ahead Clinton is. To vote for Clinton simply because she has a decent lead in the polls would be stupid if that is the only reason.

To say that supporting Sanders is stupid is to imply that you only have one choice: Clinton. That's not a choice BY DEFINITION. A choice is a choice between two or more is a choice.
A choice of only one is logically insane.

It's not just her Iraq war vote.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/10/30/1442802/-Make-no-mistake-A-vote-for-Hillary-is-a-vote-for-war

[Zache]

If he only wins Vermont and/or New Hampshire, he will be reasonable and suspend his campaign around April-May. If he does this, it will be interesting where his supporters go, especially since I don't believe Bernie will endorse Hillary. Hillary cannot win without Bernie's base, and I suspect a large number of us will defect to third parties, or even a decent Republican candidate like John Kasich, if only to send a message to the DNC that it is unacceptable for them to keep fielding us corporatist Democrats.

He's endorsed every Democratic candidate since who, Mondale? And I'm pretty sure Clinton has always been the general Bernie voter's second choice in the polls, even with Biden, the three stooges, and other/no one as options.