The rich want a very strong welfare state -- for themselves. Thus they can take huge risks and have the taxpayers bail them out, get huge subsidies at taxpayer expense, tax breaks, favorable trade legislation, etc.

Of course that isn't socialism. — Xtrix

That's socialism for the rich and powerful(including elected officials) and brute careless capitalism for everyone else.

There are no socialists running. — creativesoul

Oh thank god.

There is one person in the Democratic Party campaign contingent who obviously scares Trump...Joe Biden. He is the one Trump most fears as an opponent. — Frank Apisa

If I were Trump I would love nothing better than to have Joe Biden as the Democratic nominee thanks to his 40 year career as a non-progressive establishment Democrat, his deteriorating brain which disallows him to speak for more than several minutes without digressing in an incoherent blob.

Further, Joe Biden's support among the youth is abysmal and his nomination would lay bare the disdain the Democratic party's establishment has for the concerns of its Millennial/Gen Z constituents who are inheriting the mistakes made by their parents and older generations.

And according to a Lev Parnas leaked audio, Trump claimed, "If Bernie would have been VP it would have been tougher...I got 20% of Bernie vote [note, this is not true, it was ~12%] because of trade. He's a big trade guy...Had she picked Bernie Sanders it would have been tougher. He is the only one I didn't want her to pick."

If I were Trump I would love nothing better than to have Joe Biden as the Democratic nominee thanks to his 40 year career as a non-progressive establishment Democrat, his deteriorating brain which disallows him to speak for more than several minutes without digressing in an incoherent blob.

Further, Joe Biden's support among the youth is abysmal and his nomination would lay bare the disdain the Democratic party's establishment has for the concerns of its Millennial/Gen Z constituents who are inheriting the mistakes made by their parents and older generations.

And according to a Lev Parnas leaked audio, Trump claimed, "If Bernie would have been VP it would have been tougher...I got 20% of Bernie vote [note, this is not true, it was ~12%] because of trade. He's a big trade guy...Had she picked Bernie Sanders it would have been tougher. He is the only one I didn't want her to pick." — Maw

One...you are not Trump, Maw.

Two...if you were, you would be terrified of Biden...JUST AS TRUMP IS.

Three...Bernie stands for many of the things I see as essential to a more reasonable system...but I think Bernie would be a disaster as the candidate. Despite the fact that I agree with many of his "proposals" (wishes)...I hope he is not the Democratic Party candidate. I WILL ENTHUSIASTICALLY VOTE FOR HIM IF HE IS...because I would vote for Satan rather than Trump.

oh ok

Further, Joe Biden's support among the youth is abysmal and his nomination would lay bare the disdain the Democratic party's establishment has for the concerns of its Millennial/Gen Z constituents who are inheriting the mistakes made by their parents and older generations. — Maw

This is an interesting question. Yet are the older generations more important in the voting electorate? The younger generations seem to be less active to vote, so perhaps Boomers & Gen X are still more important than they appear at first.

Right, historically younger generations are less active voters compared to older generations, however your second graph ends in 2012, when nearly all of Gen Z were unable to vote. Looking at more contemporary data, you can see in the graph below that youth participation enjoyed a larger percentage jump than older generations, compared to 4 years earlier. What young voters require is motivation and they won't get that with Biden.

More to the point, the issue isn't voter rate between generations. Given the population differences between generations, as per your graph, the crux of the matter is the absolute numbers of voters. This was substantiated by research from PEW (although they bucketed Gen X with Millennials and Gen Z), which shows that younger generations outvoted older generations in the 2018 election. And a majority of Gen Z, the largest population out of any generation, are still are not old enough to vote, and so will have an even greater impact in the 2020 election (and beyond) and they enter voting age.

Two...if you were, you would be terrified of Biden...JUST AS TRUMP IS. — Frank Apisa

There's no evidence of this at all. Again, gut feelings isn't political analysis.

Biden would be a terrible candidate. Just more establishment Democrat bullshit -- exactly like Hillary.

Maybe Trump fears him, maybe not. We have no idea. Trump's an imbecile anyway, so who cares?

Thanks, maw. Your answer was reasonable and informative.

(So that's a notch on the wall.)

Two...if you were, you would be terrified of Biden...JUST AS TRUMP IS.
— Frank Apisa

There's no evidence of this at all. Again, gut feelings isn't political analysis.

Biden would be a terrible candidate. Just more establishment Democrat bullshit -- exactly like Hillary.

Maybe Trump fears him, maybe not. We have no idea. Trump's an imbecile anyway, so who cares? — Xtrix

Well...I think Trump's actions with regard to Biden IS evidence of his fear of the man, but I agree so completely with your last statement about Trump being an imbecile, that I will leave that as a final comment.

NYT Endorses Elizabeth Warren and Amy Klobuchar — 180 Proof

Four years ago they endorsed Hilary Clinton. For a good paper, they are apt to make unpopular choices. Maybe they are paid off. I dunno.

There's no evidence of this at all. Again, gut feelings isn't political analysis. — Xtrix

This is true... it's also true that political analysis is not gut feelings.

You wouldn't believe what most voters consider important when they make a choice on the ballots.

Some always vote for red-haired candidates.

Some always vote for the female candidates.

Some vote for the wife beater candidate.

Some, for the racist ones.

Some, for whoever their wives tells them to.

Some, randomly. (There are those as well.)

And the list is approaching infinite length.

NYT Endorses Elizabeth Warren and Amy Klobuchar
— 180 Proof

Four years ago they endorsed Hilary Clinton. For a good paper, they are apt to make unpopular choices. Maybe they are paid off. I dunno. — god must be atheist

:roll: Déjà vu all over again, huh?

Des Moines Register endorses Warren 9 days before Iowa primary.

Here come all the hit pieces now that Bernie is surging in the polls. The establishment is nervous. Articles like "Bernie Can't Win," "Running Bernie against Trump is Insane" etc. How predictable.

Articles like "Bernie Can't Win," — Xtrix

I saw this in the Atlantic and actually laughed out loud. They're fucking terrified, and it's hilarious. The article itself is mind-bending too: it compares Warren to Sanders on transgender issues, and disfavourably knocks Sanders for emphasising healthcare over - wait for it - Warren's promise to read out names in a fucking rose garden. Bsvakdvzjclcgsusks. Words actually fail.

"Running Bernie against Trump is Insane" — Xtrix

Since it's counter to conventional wisdom, it would be.. bold. If you're from New England, there's a factor you may not be aware of. To the rest of the country, Bernie doesn't even slightly seem like "one of us." All Trump has to do is attach "socialist" to him somehow, and that foreignness becomes scary.

I don't expect you to listen to what I'm trying to tell you. I've just got downtime and extra energy.

Frank, I'm listening. You might be right of course -- but you might be wrong, too. That's why we have to go on the only evidence we have. Just asserting "Bernie doesn't even slightly seem like 'one of us'" isn't an argument. He's done fine outside of New England, and as I've mentioned before is one of the most popular politicians in America AND was polling better than Clinton was in '16 versus Trump.

If Bernie isn't one of you, who is? Biden? Warren? Bloomberg? The argument can be made they're not one of you either, in fact more so.

Let's face it: for some people, a (D) next to your name is all it takes to be counted as an outsider. It's not like there's a magic candidate that will make people like this start looking closely at the issues and suddenly become rational.

This is the one that had me laughing out loud:

http://nymag.com/intelligencer/2020/01/bernie-sanders-electable-trump-2020-nomination-popular-socialism.html

Good. The more they push, the more Clinton talks up how unlikable he is, etc., the more he'll gain.

Frank, I'm listening. You might be right of course -- but you might be wrong, too. — Xtrix

I definitely might be wrong. There's an aspect to contemporary politics that is purely aesthetic. We refer to NIxon and Kennedy appearing on television as the point where it started. Reagan's charisma turned out to be more important than his capabilities as a politician. Incumbents have an aesthetic advantage because they already look presidential.

A lot of people will vote based on instinct rather than knowledge of issues. That may sound terrible, but people with any experience with politicians know they say what they think you want to hear. It's business as usual for them to fail to keep their promises, and anyway, life is dynamic. If we're faced with the prospect of nuking China, who do you want in the driver's seat?

However great a president Bernie would be, to get elected, he has to appear a person who could take command of the military. In my opinion, he doesn't look that way at all. For all his idiocy, Trump the Bully looks like a better bet in a street fight.

What do you actually think about how Bernie presents himself? Does he appear strong to you?

Bernie doesn't even slightly seem like "one of us."

Is it the 3 houses? All power to him. Even a self-proclaimed democratic socialist can make it big in America.

Stop pretending to be American. It's annoying.

I actually like Bernie, but I apologize for shining a light on your sacred cows.

I actually like Bernie — NOS4A2

Me too.

What do you actually think about how Bernie presents himself? Does he appear strong to you? — frank

About as strong as Trump does -- 70-somethings with a lot of bluster. Sure, Trump wears more makeup and is fatter -- plus he talks a good game. But all he's ever done is hide behind his money, his lawyers, and his bodyguards. Bernie knows far more about foreign policy, and he talks forcefully and with true conviction.

If you're asking who'd win in a fight -- who knows? Who cares? I suppose people do care about stuff like that, but back in 2000 it was all about "who you'd have a beer with." How'd that turn out? It's true people vote for all kinds of emotional reasons, but the point is that we have no way of figuring that out.

It reminds me of playing poker. Plenty of people play poker and make decisions based on all kinds of weird beliefs. In the long run, they're losers, and all you can do if you're a good player is make mathematically correct choices.

Bernie is the right choice, regardless of what cards come. Let's just try a non neo-liberal candidate for the first time in 50 years.

I'm from the far opposite side of the country and Bernie definitely seems like "one of us" to me.

from the far opposite side of the country and Bernie definitely seems like "one of us" to me. — Pfhorrest

Fine. He's the all American boy. He's still dividing the Democratic party.

Does he appear strong to you? — frank

Very. The best kind of strength, the kind that's not afraid to stand up to bullies, but isn't going to become one either. That's exactly the kind of person I want holding the nuclear football: someone who's not going to use it, and is not going to stand for anyone else using theirs either, who's actually going to show concern for whatever is pushing anyone else to consider using theirs, bring them to the negotiating table, and talk out a win-win solution instead of just threatening lose-lose unless we get our way. A principled negotiator.

Only 53% of Sanders supporters say they would definitely support an alternate Democratic candidate per Newsweek.

Which side of that split are you on?

That depends on exactly what they mean by that.

I live in an extremely "safe" state where my personal vote is unlikely to influence the actual electoral outcome. As such, I usually vote third party in protest, to encourage the Democrats to move more toward the party I vote for so as to try to recapture that vote. I will probably vote Democratic in the general presidential election if Bernie gets the nomination, to reward them for that. Otherwise, probably Green.

But if I lived in a swing state, where my individual vote stood a chance of actually mattering, I would definitely vote for whichever Democratic candidate got the nomination just to prevent the worst option from winning. And I advocate for everybody else to do the same: if you live in a safe state, vote your conscience, vote third party unless you really do like a mainstream candidate best, vote whichever one you like, whether your state is safe red or safe blue and whether you lean left or right, vote your conscience when your vote matters so little, because doing otherwise is throwing it away. But if you live in a swing state, vote Democratic, even if their candidate sucks, because the Republican is assuredly worse.

And I advocate — Pfhorrest

I understand. I think a fair number of people think in terms of advocation or perhaps think their political leanings say something about who they are and so they defend their choices as they defend themselves.

Bernie supporters are known for intensity and the Newsweek article is pointing to the short sightedness that goes along with that. Though you aren't fanatical, I note that you also look at the scene through emotion-laden lenses instead of assessing it mechanically, which is fine. The Democratic party is not devoid of people who can look at the situation with cold reason. Those people are in a bad situation at present.