Sanders would have won

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

Sanders wouldn't get clobbered in the Rust Belt. In GE, with the race heating up, he would hold onto minority base like any other Democratic nominee. You may say "but Hillary", yet minority base hardly made difference in crucial states such as Florida and North Carolina, as well as in the north it seems, despite all the support she had there.

We are spending a lot of time talking about what the Democrats did wrong and not as much time talking about what Trump did right. He's what the people wanted and knew how to connect in a way that no one else could.

How about minimizing the damage? Democrats could do better with these people, but failed.

Look man, we've had our disagreements, but we were on the same side and I'm hardly happy with what happened. So I'm not here to gloat or anything. I think we should just have enough intellectual integrity to accept Hillary was not the best candidate (and I'm not just talking about Sanders, I'm talking about the party essentially clearing the field of candidates for her). Her mistakes and Trump's success are two sides of the same coin. You can't separate the two.

[jaichind]

Trump won $100K+ household income which is 31% of the electorate only by 48-47.  If Sander runs I agree the would do better for non-college Whites, especially in the Midwest but I am sure he would get clobbered by Trump in the $100K household income electorate.  Trump can still run the same populist campaign and tied Sanders to BLM etc etc so he will still make progress in non-college Whites even if it is not as much as it would be against Clinton.  I suspect Sanders will overall do worse than Clinton.

[Famous Mortimer]

Trump won $100K+ household income which is 31% of the electorate only by 48-47.  If Sander runs I agree the would do better for non-college Whites, especially in the Midwest but I am sure he would get clobbered by Trump in the $100K household income electorate.  Trump can still run the same populist campaign and tied Sanders to BLM etc etc so he will still make progress in non-college Whites even if it is not as much as it would be against Clinton.  I suspect Sanders will overall do worse than Clinton.

100k household means 2 people making 50k. Most of the time, those are the people getting hit hardest by insurance premiums. Bernie would have done well with them by not having to pretend Obamacare was great.

[Ronnie]

Russ Douthat makes a good point:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

https://mobile.twitter.com/DouthatNYT/status/796728057587503105

[ApatheticAustrian]

the bloomberg thingie and other strange outcomes (maybe virginia voters would have been shocked?) surely make this more complicated, but....

after digging into the numbers i now think, sanders would have improved the electoral college chances for Dems and MAYBE decreased their popular vote lock.

it's all about a few thousand voters in the right states.

[HagridOfTheDeep]

I just hate savaging a fundamentally good woman when it is not clear at all that she was as horrible as people are now wanting to say. Trump, apparently, was just really good. That wouldn't have changed against Sanders, and we can't know how he would have done. We do know, though, that we lost the primary, so the whole thing is stupid.

Even so... Michigan has a huge black population that might have been even less motivated by Sanders. Hillary reached other voters that he would have alienated. I just think this is so f-cking silly.

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

I just hate savaging a fundamentally good woman when it is not clear at all that she was as horrible as people are now wanting to say. Trump, apparently, was just really good. That wouldn't have changed against Sanders, and we can't know how he would have done. We do know, though, that we lost the primary, so the whole thing is stupid.

Even so... Michigan has a huge black population that might have been even less motivated by Sanders. Hillary reached other voters that he would have alienated. I just think this is so f-cking silly.

I do understand, Hagrid. The sheer amount of crap Hillary received this season alone is mindblowing. I still, however, stand by my opinion (which I voiced even when she was appearing to have headed for sure victory) she was not a good candidate. It doesn't make her any worse person.

As of Sanders and Black voters, I'm not sure he'd do "worse". Hillary's connection to this group didn't help much this election. I really think he'd do better among white voters in WI, OH, MI and PA, which decided this damn election. So would Biden.

[RaphaelDLG]

I just hate savaging a fundamentally good woman when it is not clear at all that she was as horrible as people are now wanting to say. Trump, apparently, was just really good. That wouldn't have changed against Sanders, and we can't know how he would have done. We do know, though, that we lost the primary, so the whole thing is stupid.

Even so... Michigan has a huge black population that might have been even less motivated by Sanders. Hillary reached other voters that he would have alienated. I just think this is so f-cking silly.

1) HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

2) I agree she isn't the antichrist that RWers and the media made her out to be, but also LOLOL at "fundamentally good woman."

3) Those same black voters that helped Sanders win the Michigan primary?!?  That was his best state for black voters.

[Marokai Backbeat]

The "but Hillary does so much better with minorities!" argument would've been a good one had she not performed at John Kerry levels with those groups against Trump in the end, anyway.

[HagridOfTheDeep]

The "but Hillary does so much better with minorities!" argument would've been a good one had she not performed at John Kerry levels with those groups against Trump in the end, anyway.

Yes, but we can't know how Bernie would have done. The only measure we have is how he did in the primaries. With Bernie, the bottom really could have fallen out on minority turnout.