Gonna say now that Sanders would be a poor choice for VP. When one of the worries around your candidacy is age-based (Hillary would be the oldest president ever at time of inauguration), going for someone even older than you wouldn't really be fulfilling the basic function of what a VP is there for. The people supporting Bernie aren't so dim that they'd only accept Bernie himself as a VP candidate to be united behind the ticket - there are plenty of potential young VP candidates who could appeal to Bernie fans.

Woudn't she be 2nd oldest?

 

Yeah but it would unite the two parts of the left - when the two parts are divided those are elections the left loses.

She'd be older than Reagan was at inauguration - Reagan was 68, she'd be 69.

 

And you're missing my point that Bernie would not be the only VP candidate capable of uniting those two wings.

Tell that to the, quite frankly desperate, Bernie Bros!!

I mean if anything that wing makes a virtue of candidates just being a cipher for broader principles.

Even if 2000 hadn't made third party voting a little more of a cautionary tale (and given Dubya was running as a compassionate conservative at the time it really did make it look like there wasn't that much difference between Gore and Bush. Another cautionary tale there on taking that sort of positioning at face value from either the left or right), I just don't see that many Bernie supporters really will stay at home when faced with the prospect of an open racist as president.

 

Particularly also as in practice it hasn't been that divisive or dirty a fight between Bernie and Hillary. Despite the online supporter warring, Hillary really hasn't gone hardball in attacks on Bernie - she hasn't said anything so outright attacking that it would disqualify her to many Bernie supporters in terms of her values.

 

Pretty much agree with all you say. Anyone leaning to the left is by definition anti-Trump. I don't think the redneck vote (which is what we're really talking about) would be inclined to follow any Democratic candidate. The question is can Trump get beyond his (obviously fairly big) fanbase of right-wing or disgruntled followers and convince a whole nation that a super-rich pouty, bullying, misogynistic, borderline-racist, borderline-zealot who's had no experience whatsoever in politics can be taken seriously as leader of the free world? One can only hope that the average American isn't as stupid as they are made out to be.

 

As I speak, Trump is ranting on and on about Clinton, Romney, and all very very personal remarks. The whole Republican side has degenerated into a slanging match about each other (and the rivals) rather than anything to do with actual potential policies and politics. Trump shows his true colours every time he opens his mouth and he will very definitely be a marmite candidate. How he can expect to govern when he's alienated his own party - Obama (very moderate and reasoned) struggled with the Republicans throughout - is looking like a major point of attack to me. He could end up a total lame (albeit mouthy) duck.

Pretty much agree with all you say. Anyone leaning to the left is by definition anti-Trump. I don't think the redneck vote (which is what we're really talking about) would be inclined to follow any Democratic candidate. The question is can Trump get beyond his (obviously fairly big) fanbase of right-wing or disgruntled followers and convince a whole nation that a super-rich pouty, bullying, misogynistic, borderline-racist, borderline-zealot who's had no experience whatsoever in politics can be taken seriously as leader of the free world? One can only hope that the average American isn't as stupid as they are made out to be.

 

He already has. Quite a large amount of self-described moderates have supported him if opinion polls are anything to go by. And more will do so once he tones down his rhetoric when he gets the nomination and moves towards the centre, which he inevitably will do up until he wins in November.

Hasn't Trump been taking a pretty consistent percentage of the vote across all demographics? (In fact I'm pretty sure he's actually stronger with 'moderates' than the more extreme conservatives, though I don't think there are many actual moderates voting in the Republican primaries).

Yeah, we're talking self-identified moderates by registered Republican standards here. I mean, when the self-identified conservatives are saying their issue with Trump is that his anti-immigration position is ALL TALK...

I stand to be corrected here, but the polls about demographics seem to be among his voting supporters not the wider public at large. Some of the views expressed in some polls I've read are of the order of:

 

31% of Trump supporters think gays should be banned from entering the country.

 

54% of Trump supporters think islam should be banned in the USA.

 

Well, there goes my Florida holidays if he gets in power, eh?

 

Teaparty rednecks and religious zealots slagging off other religions. Pot calling the kettle I'd hazard a guess. On the plus side at least they aren't in favour of throwing gays off buildings (well, at least they weren't asked if they were in favour) and it's good to know that so many supporters of Donald Trump are prepared to say that the freedoms enshrined in the Declaration Of Independance need changing. Gives me real optimism about gun ownership - can't pick and choose which elements can be dropped after all if you choose to ignore one part of it. :kink:

I stand to be corrected here, but the polls about demographics seem to be among his voting supporters not the wider public at large. Some of the views expressed in some polls I've read are of the order of:

 

31% of Trump supporters think gays should be banned from entering the country.

 

54% of Trump supporters think islam should be banned in the USA.

 

Well, there goes my Florida holidays if he gets in power, eh?

 

Do you have a link to said opinion polls?

 

I'm so glad my american holiday falls when Obama is, just about, still the president.

Maybe not Sanders himself, but I do think Clinton's vice president pick should be someone who appeals to white working-class men who is seen as "authentic". That would compensate for some of her big weaknesses vis-a-vis Trump. I would agree that young people, for all their lack of enthusiasm for Clinton, will probably turn out anyway if faced with Trump as the alternative, and Trump would probably also keep the Latinos safe for her too (so there would be little to gain from Julian Castro as the running mate).

 

I was going to say Jim Webb would be an ideal candidate for the VP spot, but I've just seen he said he'd vote for Trump over Hillary, so....

 

The Democrats really should be cursing John Edwards'.....lack of discipline, because he would be a good remedy for a lot of the Democrats' problems right now.

Edited March 5, 20169 yr by Danny

Nobody who cared about their hair that much would be an obvious white working class gimme pick.

That said I can't think of anyone in the Democrats who would be. Heidi Heitkamp?

Do you have a link to said opinion polls?

 

sorry I was flicking through a load at work (during lunch) and the one I looked at isn't cropping up when I google. It wasn't (I think) a major poll though, they were quoting opinions from as low as 100 or so Trump voters which is hardly representative - it was though the only one I came across that asked a large number of questions on many different issues. Most of the others just seem to focus on overall percentages of popularity, or break it down amongst regions or ethnic groups.

 

Newsnight interviewed some mountain folk about why he was so popular. Bottom line the poor have been hit hard by the banking crisis, the rich have all got away with everything and are even richer, the poor (who caused none of it) are fed up with the establishment, don't trust them and don't feel they are looking after their interests. This is pretty much across much of the western world. Sadly, politicians like to divert blame to immigrants as in some way being the source of all the ills, rather than the greedy selfish rich. Result: poorly-educated poor people in many countries are looking desperately for someone to turn back the clock to the good old days before 2008 and latch onto anyone who promises the world while kicking "the establishment" in the pants.

Looking like a pretty bad night for Trump as Ted Cruz has won Kansas by a large margin and looks like winning Maine too. Please don't let a Cruz nomination still be on the cards. :drama:

Oh PLEASE DO

 

For all that Trump is super-toxic for the Republicans I do think there is more chance of him beating Hillary than Cruz has. Trump has turned having his cake and eating it into an art form, which is a dangerous skill to have. Cruz is pretty much defined into a rut, and it's one that's unlikely to get north of 200 electoral votes.

I would bite your hand off for a Cruz nomination. Tea Party politics is a known quantity so I can't see him shifting the debate to the right during the campaign in the same way that Trump could.

She'd be older than Reagan was at inauguration - Reagan was 68, she'd be 69.

 

And you're missing my point that Bernie would not be the only VP candidate capable of uniting those two wings.

Reagan was 69 years, 349 days old at inauguration actually. Hilary Clinton would be 69 years, 86 days old, so second oldest at inauguration.