Bernie Sanders “may” run for president in 2016

Senator Bernie Sanders (I-VT) will consider making a run for the White House in 2016 if “no one else with progressive views similar to his” enters the race.

Do you hear Elizabeth Warren in that?

This piece has interesting overtones.

Bernie Sanders

Bernie Sanders

Here’s the story from the Burlington Free Press. I’m picking up near the middle, but do read from the start. You’ll get more context. While acknowledging Sanders knows he likely won’t win:

Still, Sanders says he is willing to consider making a run if no one else with progressive views similar to his ends up taking the plunge.


Elizabeth Warren

It is essential, he said, to have someone in the 2016 presidential campaign who is willing to take on Wall Street, address the “collapse” of the middle class, tackle the spread of poverty and fiercely oppose cuts to Social Security and Medicare.

Also, addressing global warming needs to be a top priority, not an afterthought, Sanders said.

“Under normal times, it’s fine, you have a moderate Democrat running, a moderate Republican running,” Sanders said. “These are not normal times. The United States right now is in the middle of a severe crisis and you have to call it what it is.”

In the article, Sanders says he’s quite a fan of Elizabeth Warren. Make of that what you will.

More from Sanders via Politico:

“This is not an individual thing, this is not a personal thing,” he told POLITICO in an interview Monday afternoon in his D.C. office. “This country today — we’re not living in normal times. These are incredibly challenging times and there are huge issues out there that have got to be addressed. And it would be a disaster for this country to go through a campaign where you had candidates who are not talking about the collapse of the middle class, growing wealth and income inequality, growth in poverty, global warming.”

What we know is that:

(1) Hillary Clinton looks like she may be running.

(2) Warren has said she’s not in the race.

(3) No progressive will enter the race while Clinton is positioned as an option.


To follow or send links: @Gaius_Publius

Gaius Publius is a professional writer living on the West Coast of the United States.

Share This Post

76 Responses to “Bernie Sanders “may” run for president in 2016”

  1. chaoszen says:

    My dream team in 2016 is Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders. They together could salvage this country from the brink of disaster. But my dreams most often never materialize. And this one may not either. But it’s good to dream and sometimes they come true. But not often…

  2. Indigo says:

    You read that exactly the way it is. I reluctantly agree! The obvious choice in the palace intrigues, based on dcinsider’s evaluation is . . . omigaud! . . . the Hillary! Then again, one could vote one’s conscience and let the palace intrigue play itself out as it likes.

  3. Indigo says:

    I don’t hate you. It does sound like a Nixonism, now that you mention it. I don’t know where it came from exactly. You’ve heard of the hawks and the doves of yore, during the Viet Nam adventure, no doubt. And among the doves were many of the liberal, pony-tailed, hippie professors of those days, seeped mostly in Marxism and other non-capitalist philosophical structures that upset, aggravated, and annoyed the John Bircher types of those days (similar to the Tea Party-ers as we know them today).

    The Birchers and their ilk considered the liberal professoriate to be a bunch of Commies, i.e., Communist and Pinkos (fellow travelers to the Reds, i.e. Communists) and since you need a third insult to be really fierce, they added faggots because clearly, long-haired hippie professors were obviously faggots. Thus . . . Commie-Pinko-Fag. I embrace it proudly! (That was back during the Cold War. Nowadays, we’re mostly tired, retired or already dead.)

  4. ezpz says:

    Considering that it’s been 5 years since Bush has been out of office, any comparison between the two is meaningless. And to his credit, unlike Clinton, Cheney and others, Bush has not said one bad word about Obama since he (Obama) took office and before. At this point, invoking Bush in the context of ‘he (Bush) did it too’ or he was worse and people died’ is a pretty lame defense of the indefensible re this administration.

  5. mpeasee says:

    …damn, that’s a stinger…I am personally sick of the Clinton’s…that daughter too. Bill coined “…this is the end of big government…” after he and Hills got there due and cuts everyone else off at the knees. His/their shadiness was proven to me with the whole Haiti debacle…scammers!

  6. Bill_Perdue says:

    Hillary Clinton was on the Board of Directors of WalMart for six years.

    WalMart repays her and Bill Clinton for union busting and NAFTA by subsidizing their scam project the Clinton Global Initiative.

  7. Bill_Perdue says:

    It took years to get the unions going in fast food, etc, because the union bosses were too busy having lunch with Democrats to bother. Walmart workers qualify for and get Medicaid and food stamps. “The more we hear about McDonald’s HR resource center, appropriately titled McResources, the more we learn about the darkness of the human soul. Almost one month to the day after learning that their help center tells its employees to sign up for food stamps, Mickey D’s has struck again. This time their website suggests its hungry, underpaid employees to break their food up into smaller bites so that it “results in eating less and still feeling full.” The New York Times’s Steve Greenhouse, a labor reporter, tweeted this screenshot of the McResources page that has many people aghast.”

    Democrats support a $10.10 minimum wage, they’re not on our side.

    Walmart workers qualify for and get m Medicaid and food stamps.

  8. mpeasee says:

    ….she is from Arkansas and I am sure Walmart with line her up with cash too….

  9. Drew2u says:

    If only the entire workforce of Walmart, McDonald’s, and Walt Disney World all strike against unfair hiring and labor practices…
    I’ll give credit where credit is due, but it’s still a long, difficult process (though if the DNC and Debbie W-S start giving Rs-turned-Ds money, that should make it just a little bit easier, neh?)

  10. Bill_Perdue says:

    It’s great for the socialist movement as a whole. We do elections to educate and organize, not with any illusions that they’d let us run things if we won. What the American rich did in Iran, Chile and dozens of other countries where oppositionists won elections is what they’d do here.

    It would have been remarkable even if she’d lost by a close margin. It means that people are learning hard lessons about the Democrats and Republicans, the political enemies of the left.

    Her minimum wage campaign will embarrass the Democrats and encourage the self organizing drives of fast food and big box workers even further. That will embarrass the AFL-CIO ‘suits’, who have a spousal abuse relationship with the Democrats as well. No more pretending to be for working people for either of them. Sawant held her victory rally at the headquarters of SEIU, who had endorsed her opponent, the Democrat scab Conlin. Sweetness.

    As an aside, the other big news is that the Wal-Mart strikes have spread from Texas, LA and Chicago to Ohio and elsewhere. When the strikes become national big box and fast food workers are going to change the face of American unions and politics. Shades of 1934.

  11. Drew2u says:

    Would you hate me if I said the phrase is familiar to me, but I don’t quite get it? Was it uttered by Nixon? >_>

  12. Drew2u says:

    You’re also talking about Seattle, a town in an arguably very progressive region that trends ahead of the curve on a lot of issues.
    On top of that, her win is by a pretty thin margin, it’s not a blowout.
    Still, great for Ms. Sawant – and her platform reads about basic fairness and justice, as far as I see it, and not one of those hippie commie pinko socialists. ;)

  13. Bill_Perdue says:

    Some people know exactly what it means – “Seattle voters have elected a socialist to city council for the first time in modern history. Kshama Sawant, a member of the populist Occupy Seattle movement, ran on a platform of raising Washington State’s minimum wage to $15 and levying a “millionaire tax” to pay for mass transit and public education. Sawant took 50.3 percent of the vote to incumbent Richard Conlin’s 49.4 percent. Even in this liberal city, Sawant’s win has surprised many here because Conlin was backed by the city’s political establishment.”
    Socialist wins seat on Seattle city council

  14. Abby says:

    We do not need anymore Nobility Presidents, No Clintons or Bush’s, it is time to treat all of our people with some harmonious stability, go Bernie Sanders.

  15. Bill_Perdue says:

    I guess we’d better come up with a better catch phrase than Bush Lite. It was popular in 2008 because nobody thought that Hillary Clinton, McCain, Biden or Obama would be worse than Bush. Now we know better.

  16. ezpz says:

    Agree. Again, I can’t help but think of Glen Ford’s brilliant coining of the phrase: “more effective evil”

    And to your previous comment — while I agree with it, I think Obama is Bush-heavy, not lite. As you point out, he has expanded on so many of Bush/Cheney’s egregious policies – even beyond Cheny’s wildest dreams.
    And it will continue because the faux left allows it, even encourages it.

  17. Bill_Perdue says:

    In many ways – NDAA, union busting, the gift of trillions to the rich and the murder or US citizens – Obama is much, much worse than the Clintons or the Bushes. The truth is that each of them has combined unparalleled attacks on working people and our unions with endless wars of aggression.

    When Republicans can’t carry out their program the rich call in their second string, the Democrats, who do end runs that Republicans can’t.

  18. ezpz says:

    Thank you.

  19. Bill_Perdue says:

    The use of misogynist slurs regarding Hillary Clinton or any woman is divisive and reactionary. She, like all Democrats, stands condemned by reactionary politics and not by gender.

  20. emjayay says:

    I guess that’s all some sort of joke I don’t get.

  21. emjayay says:

    It depends on what he runs as and how things work out in the process. Bringing his (or Warren’s) issues to the fore can only be a good thing. But if he gets on any ballots in the general election that can’t be a good thing. I mean, it would be a great thing if he won. But since there is no way in hell he will get numbers any higher than Nader did, and 90% of those will be from people who would have voted Democrat otherwise, it is not a good thing.
    This is just not a parliamentary system we have here. And the Tea Fartiers (haha I just made that up) are inside the Republican party and do not run outside it, unfortunately.

  22. Bill_Perdue says:

    Obama is Bush Lite.

    How many troops do we have in Iraq? the Obama regime had nothing to do with the US withdrawal from Iraq. That was was based on the U.S.–Iraq Status of Forces Agreement signed by the Bush regime in 2008 and on the threat of the Iraqi government to prosecute US soldiers and mercenaries for war crimes during the Bush and Obama occupations and the Bush invasion.

    How many troops do we have in Afghanistan? 68,000. Obama wants to keep thousands more there after 2014, in violation of promises to end the US occupation or Afghanistan in 2014.

    How many prisoners does the CIA torture each year? That is always a state secret and has been since the Vietnam War. Rendition, which includes kidnapping, torture and murder began during the Clinton regime (*) and was continued by the Bush and Obama regime. “New Report on Torture, Extraordinary Rendition – A meticulously documented report on post-9/11 torture and interrogation from The Constitution Project, a legal research and advocacy group, concludes that “it is indisputable that the United States engaged in the practice of torture” and that US officials in the highest echelons of government are the ones responsible for it. … The report is comprehensive and is critical both of the Bush administration’s conduct and of the Obama administration’s, which blocked efforts to get a full account of the torture programs.” As I pointed out, the use of kidnapping, torture and murder is a state secret.

    Did he pass a universal health care bill? No, after promising the ‘public option’ he betrayed that promise and passed Romneycare/Obamacare, a scam the leaves healthcare in the hands of the rich and the corporations they own and control. .

    (*) On April 25, 1996 Clinton signed the Antiterrorism and Effective Death
    Penalty Act…”Political analyst Michael Freeman called the proposal one of the “worst assaults on civil liberties in decades,” and the Houston Chronicle called it a “frightening” and “grievous” assault on domestic freedoms.” Later, The CIA was told to use rendition (the use of kidnapping, torture, torture by proxy and murder) in a presidential directive signed by Clinton in 1995, and expansion of an earlier directive by GHW Bush in 1993. (abridged from wiki)

    The question you didn’t ask is what are the names of US citizens murdered by Obama’s racist and extralegal orders. The answer is Anwar
    al-Aulaqi, Samir Khan, ‘Abd al-Rahman Anwar al-Aulaqi and Jude Mohammed. One was a sixteen year old boy from Denver Colorado.

    Remember their names, who killed them and what it means.

  23. emjayay says:

    Well, the fact that a substantial number of Americans are convinced that Obama is a Socialist, which in the deep recesses of their little brains is conflated with the Godless Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, says something.

  24. Rabblerouzzer says:

    I’d do that, too. And I’m in California.

  25. MyrddinWilt says:

    How many troops do we have in Iraq?
    How many troops do we have in Afghanistan?
    How many prisoners does the CIA torture each year?
    Did he pass a universal health care bill?

    The reason I am not disappointed is that I was never that into him in the first place. But he has succeeded in not being George W. Bush

  26. karmanot says:

    One thing is certain: if Biden wins the primary, Democrats will lose the election.

  27. karmanot says:


  28. karmanot says:

    same here

  29. karmanot says:

    Oh, Hills will put on a great show of progressive values and then betray them just as Obozo did. She is a neo-liberal, war mongering, corporate apparatchik.

  30. karmanot says:

    Remember when Obama thrilled us with speech after speech of a just course that included hope and change and then betrayed every one of his promises?

  31. karmanot says:

    Sanders is a remarkable man. During our years in VT. he always answered letters and was always available. He would make a great president or vice president. I would vote for him in a nano second. Anything, but anything to deny Hillary Clinton.

  32. Whitewitch says:

    Well done….a much better choice I am sure than either of the two main stream dreams.

  33. ComradeRutherford says:

    Each party needs a minimum number of votes to be on the ballot next time. That’s why I voted for Nader in 2000, to keep the Green Party on the ballot. I wound up voting for the Socialist Party in the last Presidential election. Anything but Obama… And obviously NOT the Republican/Conservative/Libertarian Sociopath Party.

  34. MyrddinWilt says:

    I think Biden is certain to stand for the nomination but Clinton will start so far ahead that it may turn into more of a backup campaign in case Clinton has to drop out. More of an exhibition match while the Republicans spend their time trying to out-freak each other.

  35. MyrddinWilt says:

    I am really not a fan of what happened in the 2008 GOP nomination race where something like 20-30 delegates that Romney won ended up being replaced by Ron Paul delegates through a series of backroom party maneuvers while attention was directed elsewhere.

    The biggest political achievement of the US greens to date has been to enable W. Bush to steal the Presidency from Al Gore, the guy who went on to win the Nobel Peace Prize for his work warning people about climate change.

  36. MyrddinWilt says:

    I agree. Plus I can’t see Sanders getting any coverage or face time unless he is in the nomination race. The Greens and Libertarians never get any mention.

    At this point it looks as if the Democrats will barely have a race. Baring a medical catastrophe we will have Clinton and Biden on the ballot. There aren’t going to be many top tier candidates looking to run against them. Clinton is going to start a long way ahead and Biden is going to be trying his best to avoid being interesting.

    Having Sanders there in the debates putting the progressive position is a win-win for all concerned. It means more people are likely to watch the debates, it puts the progressive position on view without risking damaging the party.

    I am not that thrilled at the idea of Warren running because (1) she has only been in the Senate ten months and (2) if Biden is the nominee then he would be under immense pressure to chose a woman for VP nominee and Warren would be the obvious choice unless she was seen to have been damaged by a premature presidential bid.

  37. lynchie says:

    No the last time the supreme court gave you Bush. Gore could not even win his home state. We don’t need another dynasty. One clinton was enough. We need new blood and we need new thinking to move the country forward.

  38. bbock says:

    Oh, I hope he runs as a Democrat. The last thing we need is a third-party progressive diluting the general election vote. Last time that gave us George W. Bush. I hope we’ve learned more. It’s true Hillary Clinton (assuming she is the nominee) is far too comfy with corporations, like her husband. We’ll end up with more NAFTAs. But I’d rather have a corportist democrat than someone like Ted Cruz or even Chris Christie.

  39. The_Fixer says:

    He’s stated that he won’t win, which is a realistic thing to say.

    But you forgot one thing in your above summary: one has to talk the talk to the voters. Never mind walking the walk once you get into office, of course.

    It would be nice to think that he would bring light to the issues that really matter to the 99%. But as long as the 1% is in power, that won’t make much of a difference.

    I fear that in order to change that, we’ll need to have damn near ruinous riots because the political system as it is won’t be able to effect meaningful change.

  40. ezpz says:

    Yes, it would be nice.
    Know any? The only ones that I know of are in the Green Party.

  41. Terry Cooper says:

    One thing that a party needs to do is to draw from the ranks of the other side. Since I live in the South, I know that there is a tremendous amount of fear mongering going on concerning the 2nd Amendment. We all know that the 2nd Amendment is not going away, but it’s an easy way for the likes of the GOP to get people riled up. There is also fear mongering concerning religion, etc. We also know that the only ones trying to force anything concerning religion are the Tea Party people. Think about how these things can be softened some and made more palatable for the hard right, and there might be a way to actually get someone who is not in it for the corporations and their bottom line.

  42. Terry Cooper says:

    The people are moving to the left, but the corporations are not and in fact may move further to the right in order to try to snag more Republican votes.

  43. Bill_Perdue says:

    It won’t be me.

  44. cole3244 says:

    if obama has proven one thing he is a great orator and campaigner but either an unenthusiastic or bad politician.

  45. Whitewitch says:

    Bill….don’t shatter my dreams…..

  46. angryspittle says:

    We desperately need this view aired nationally. Let’s hope Warren also runs. Can you imagine what having their views brought to the fore of the national discussion might accomplish? (Yeah, I am just a dreamer)

  47. Bill_Perdue says:

    A forlorn hope.

  48. Bill_Perdue says:

    Shades of 1860.

  49. Bill_Perdue says:

    Sanders is a social democrat, a reformist. His major drawback is his long history of working with with Democrats because there are so few leftists elected because of anti-democratic voting measures and campaign measures that keep us off the ballot.

    That problem will never go away for the left but the political climate, under the impact of the ongoing Clinton depression is providing is providing the left with new opportunities to use the electoral politics as a way to educate and organize working people and rebuild unions. Al Jazeera reports “Seattle voters have elected a socialist to city council for the first time in modern history. Kshama Sawant, a member of the populist Occupy Seattle movement, ran on a platform of raising Washington State’s minimum wage to $15 and levying a “millionaire tax” to pay for mass transit and public education. Sawant took 50.3 percent of the vote to incumbent Richard Conlin’s 49.4 percent. Even in this liberal city, Sawant’s win has surprised many here because Conlin was backed by the city’s political establishment. Her defeated opponent was a Democrat and she’s a member of Socialist Action and Occupy Seattle. Sweet.

    A city council win is a pretty minor except for the fact that it’s another sign of bigger changes on the horizon. Rumblings among Democrats, the possible candidacy of Sanders, a new aggressiveness by the left, challenges to the AFL-CIO sellouts by a revived and militant union left, massive to union self-organizing in big box stores and fast food chains, the education of radicals in the Occupy movements and the growth of socialist groups all signal big changes in the political consciousness of working people, people of color, youth the antiwar movement.

    Sanders candidacy, inside or outside the right centrist Democrat party, would rapidly lead to intense polarization in the national political political arena, and his opposition to the package of cuts and austerity measures proposed by Republicans and by Obama, Reid and Pelosi is quite sharp. His candidacy will increase centrifugal forces, just as the Teabagger right does in the other right centrist party, the Republicans.

  50. Indigo says:

    Indeed. I’ve taken to introducing myself in political settings as “one of the last living Commie-Pinko-Fags of the Cold War.” Frighteningly, not everybody gets it.

  51. Skycat says:

    I see a scenario where there are four candidates: a corporate Democrat (Clinton), a corporate Republican (Christie), a Tea Party candidate and Bernie Sanders.

  52. ezpz says:

    His words may not be ‘pleasing to Wall Street’ but his votes tell a different story.

    And unlike Obama with his progressive sounding rhetoric, Bernie Sanders DOES have a voting record that belies much of his people pleasing platitudes.

    Two reality based pieces:

    The Myth of Bernie Sanders

  53. mpeasee says:

    I hope he runs and anyone else that can push Hillery into a progressive sphere, i.e., Allen Grayson or Elizabeth Warren,

  54. Whitewitch says:

    I think that is the case in many states…hence my hesitance to vote the Green ticket….although I usually like their candidate…they just can’t win if they are not on EVERY ballot. Have a good one Comrade!

  55. cold340t says:

    YES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Please Run!!!!!!!!!!!!! Please!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  56. ComradeRutherford says:

    I wanted to vote for Stein, but my state didn’t allow the Green Party on it’s ballot…

  57. ComradeRutherford says:

    “drop that wishy-washy DLC centrism”

    Nope, sorry, never gonna happen. The Democratic Leadership is solidly in the realm of ‘Moderate Republican.’ This will never change, ever. Obama talked a big game, but I knew he was another moderate Republican masquerading as a Democrat, just like Bill Clinton was.

    The last time I voted for a mainstream Democrat was Clinton in 1992. And then we were all betrayed by his right-of-center policies. Since then I vote for the candidate I really want, or to help a certain party to stay on the ballot. That was why I voted for Nader in 2000: because I knew my voting district was going to go to Gore by 97%, and I wanted the Green Party to stay on the ballot for the next election – NOT because I wanted Nader to be President…

  58. ComradeRutherford says:

    I have never in my life felt the urge to volunteer for a political candidate. But if my Senator, Bernie Sanders, decides to run for President, I will eagerly go door to door, man the phones, give away lawn signs, anything.

  59. nicho says:

    Oh please, this is just theater. To run for president successfully you need (a) an organization that is pleasing to Wall Street, (b) at least a billion dollars, (c) the support of people who can give you a billion dollars, and (d) the complicity of the corporatist media. Barry had all that. Hillary has all that. Warren and Sanders do not and will not.

  60. nicho says:

    Definitely. We need another corporatist water carrier like Obama. That’s what the country needs. Unless Bernie is willing to do the bidding of Goldman Sachs — as Barry does — he will never be elected.

  61. dommyluc says:

    He can’t win, and I’d rather see both he and Warren remain in the Senate for now. But I would like both he and Warren and the rest of progressives to force Clinton to the left, which is where this country is moving. If Hillary wants to win, she’d better drop that wishy-washy DLC centrism and start talking about expanding SS, rebuilding the middle class and the other issues us whiney-ass dirty fucking hippies have been right about all along. If not, I hope an outsider comes up from behind to knock her ass out, and don’t think it can’t happen. The Rethugs are going to send someone with the same warmed-over policy plans they always throw to the electorate, and they just don’t work anymore, and I don’t think any Rethug candidate can win the nomination without going totally batshit crazy during the primaries to satisfy the dumbasses of their base.

  62. Whitewitch says:

    This confused me – I think I get from it that have a third party will get more votes for the party candidate that is similar (i.e., Former Secretary of State Clinton).

    It should be noted that several key states do not, or at lease did not have a Green Party candidate on the ticket – although that might have changed…for example West Virginia in the Bush/Kerry election. We can not risk running a candidate that will loose a state because he/she was not even on the ballot.

  63. Whitewitch says:

    I would like to see Senator Warren do something that strongly demonstrates her left leaning beliefs. I think she is a left progressive – I hope she is and I like her…however, mostly because of her junior senator position, she is mostly talk – good talk mind you, talk all the same.

    That said – I would vote for her and hope for the best…as I did with President Obama…and hope to not be disappointed, again.

  64. Drew2u says:

    “socialist” is one of those terms with no meaning in America. Ask 20 people the definition and you’ll get 20 different answers.
    Myself, I see myself as a moderate progressive, but I’m sure others would see me as a radical socialist liberal hellbent on destroying the freedoms of patriots (ad nauseam).

  65. Drew2u says:

    couldn’t the Green Party do the same thing as the Tea Party and get involved in the delegation process? Certainly putting forth progressive candidates no matter what party would be great.

  66. Whitewitch says:

    Run Bernie Run!!!! Hillary Clinton need not apply – at least in my book and I will NOT vote for her. I am tired of quasi-republicans representing the liberal position. Also tired of people without any moral code for conduct representing me. IN FACT, I will NOT vote if my only option is to hold my nose and pick the least of the stinky from a pile of skunks (no offense skunks). I did it last time and ohhh my how I regret it.

    YES, if Romney had won it would have been worse, at least though the republican party would be bearing the brunt of the ugliness which is wholly theirs. Let the NUTTERS see what they vote for…perhaps then there will be a revolution (well as least in the hearts and minds of most people).

    I know – I am dreaming…but a girl has to have her dreams.

  67. Carey Campbell says:

    The Green Party has put positive alternatives on the ballot for President in the United States since 1996. Ralph Nader in 1996, and 2000. David Cobb in 2004. Former U.S. Congress woman Cynthia McKinney in 2008, and Doctor Jill Stein in 2012.

    The Green Party has ballot status in much of the U.S. Senator Sanders has worked with the Green Party, and Green Party leaders on many issues over the years. Seems like a natural fit. U.S. Senator Sanders as a Green Party candidate.

    Ballot access is key. And the Green Party provides ballot access, and or veteran teams with the ability to do the massive petition drives to gain ballot status.

    That Green Party process for Bernie might go like this. Bernie joins the Green Party. Convinces the Progressive Party (Bernie’s Vermont State Party) to affiliate with the Green Party. Bernie seeks the Green Party nomination. It would grow the Green Party. If Bernie wins the Green Party nomination, he would have ballot access. No candidates for the Green Party nomination have yet announced, as far as I have read, or heard. Doctor Jill Stein, the 2012 Green Party nominee has been quoted as saying, she might considered another run.

    Richard Winger at Ballot Access News wrote about this yesterday.

    “Thank you, because it gives me a chance to rebut that common idea. In the non-fiction book “Predictably Irrational” by Dan Ariely, psychological research is presented that rebuts the common idea. If individuals are presented three choices and asked to choose their favorite, it turns out that if two of the three choices are similar, and yet one is inferior in some obvious way to the other similar choice, then that other similar choice gets an advantage over the third choice (the one that is not similar to either of the other two). Applying that to elections, if one candidate has a conservative platform and two candidates have a liberal platform, but one of the two candidates is obviously inferior to the other, then the other liberal candidate gets an advantage compared to the conservative candidate. Sanders would be the obvious inferior choice because he would be perceived as not having a chance to win.

    We resist this evidence because those of us who frequent web pages like this one are highly ideological people. But research on voters for over 60 years have consistently shown that most voters are not ideological. Most voters are not like the kind of people like us.

    Furthermore, other evidence supports the “Predictably Irrational” evidence. Sam Lubell’s “The Future of American Politics” shows convincing poll data that Henry Wallace not only helped Harry Truman to beat Tom Dewey in 1948, that if Wallace had not run, Truman would have lost. Also in 2004, the nation’s three leading pollsters gave extra questions to respondents who said they would vote for Ralph Nader. The extra questions showed that to a slight extent, a majority of Nader voters said if Nader weren’t running they would vote for Bush, not Kerry. This is further confirmed by the election returns for Nader in 2004. See the front page story in Ballot Access News, Jan. 1, 2005 print issue.” from Richard Winger at Ballot Access News

  68. Indigo says:

    I vote my preference, not the conventional wisdom push-poll preferences. And I’m more of a “socialist” than anything else but . . . it’s early and Hillary hasn’t declared yet. I was for Hillary before I was against her and now that Barry has disappointed me, I’m waiting for Hillary to say something really smart and gay-friendly. Something that rattles the charts.
    This much is certain: As God is my witness, I will never vote Republican again!
    [I voted for Nixon, 2nd term – ouch!]

  69. dcinsider says:

    The 2016 Ralph Nader that will insure election of a Republican. Love Bernie, but this is a bad idea.

  70. S1AMER says:

    I assume by “bitch,” you’re referring to Secretary Clinton? Do you believe it’s appropriate to refer to a prominent woman with such a vile slur? Do you use similar slurs in referring to men you don’t like, or do you misogynistically reserve such terms for women?

  71. george searing says:

    I support bernie and I hope the coke brothers give him some money as well. we need to keep that sick coprrupt bitch out of the white house

  72. Drew2u says:

    Unlike the Republican Primary freakshow, I would hope that a primary between Clinton, Warren, and Sanders would be full of decorum, polite, rational, and free of cheap personal snipes.

  73. paulabflat says:

    i’m not so sure about the “sanders knows he likely won’t win” part.

  74. cole3244 says:

    bernie is willing to pull the debate to the left and lose doing it.

    this might set warren up for a run down the line but with the gop & clinton being the only option in 2016 there might not be time to reverse this rw trend and save the middle class because hillary is part of the problem not part of the solution.

  75. Mike_in_the_Tundra says:

    It would be nice to have a true progressive running.

  76. I am a big fan of Sen. Warren. I would vote for her over everybody else if she ran.

© 2020 AMERICAblog Media, LLC. All rights reserved. · Entries RSS