Monday, December 21, 2015

Bernie Sanders Scores Big Win; Breaks Major Fundraising Record


"Killer Mike" interviews Bernie Sanders. Could this dynamic be a game-changer in southern Democratic primaries?

by Gaius Publius

In the most recent underwatched Democratic debate, there was a lot of ISIS-this and terror-that thrown around — and not one climate word, as near as I could tell. It was therefore presumed, by those who know their job is to tell us what to know, that Clinton "won" (example here).

And yet, and yet, when when people who are paid to tell you what to know are removed from the equation, stuff like this happens (go ahead; take the poll yourself to see the most current result).

From the Sanders campaign:
Bernie Sanders Scores Big Win; Breaks Major Fundraising Record

MANCHESTER, N.H. – U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders won a major victory in Saturday night’s third Democratic presidential debate, according to social media measures and in polls by Time, The Wall Street Journal and other major media websites.

During the debate, Sanders also reached a major milestone in grassroots financial support. His campaign has now received more contributions than any other candidate at this point in any White House bid — more than 2.3 million contributions.

President Barack Obama was the record holder. Through Dec. 31, 2011, his re-election campaign reported 2,209,636 donations. The Sanders campaign crossed that mark during the debate as grassroots supporters flooded the website. The average contribution for the night to the Sanders campaign was below $25.

On social media, where Sanders’ grassroots revolution began, there were more Google searches for Sanders than for any other candidate. His campaign had the most retweeted tweet of the night, according to Twitter. He gained more followers on Twitter than any other candidate and Facebook said people talked about Sanders more than any other candidate online.

After the debate, Sanders was named the winner by viewers who voted in large-sample polls from Time, PBS, The Wall Street Journal, Slate, and The Washington Times.

On Time’s website, for example, 84 percent of the 27,246 who had taken the poll in the first 90 minutes after the debate said Sanders won.
Sanders is winning support from Democrats hand over fist. Will that be enough to win him the actual nomination? I guess we'll see. If you'd like to lend your support to Sanders and to those courageous candidates who have dared to stand with him, you can do so here (adjust the split any way you like at the link).

Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada, South Carolina

These are the states that count for Sanders, the states that will keep him viable or secure the nomination for Clinton — in order, Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada, South Carolina. According to the latest polls, Clinton has a narrow lead in Iowa (+5), Sanders has a large lead in New Hampshire (+14), Clinton has a very large lead in South Carolina (+36), and a decent lead, according to one out-of-date poll, in Nevada (+16).

I wouldn't count this a done deal, however. A Sanders win in Iowa would go a long way to stretch his viability. Nevada is not out of reach — Sanders has DREAM activist Cesar Vargas working for him there — and even the South Carolina lead that Clinton has depends on almost-automatic institutional support for mainstream Democrats by a community for whom, especially, "black lives matter." Clinton, remember, has a track record on racial justice issues, and even today supports the (clearly racially biased) death penalty. The pro-institutional-Democrat dynamic could easily shift, especially if more like the video at the top turns up.

All of which is to say — if you're a Sanders supporter and not a surrender kind of person, the time to lift your hand to the task is now. (For example, got time to spend in Iowa?)


Labels: , , , , , ,


At 6:12 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

And thus the difference between polls and voting. Not all who are polled will vote.

The democrats are faced with a true dilemma (one would think). If they want to win the senate back and maybe even the house (doubtful due to gerrymandering), they *NEED* Bernie to win and bring out 15M-25M nonvoters who would not bother if hilbillary, the corporate-banking-oil-war-SOS candidate is the nom. However, their BIIIIG money donors can't have any of the Bern or they might suffer a slowdown in their rate of enrichment.

So the DNC, in an obvious proof of their total sellout, is doing all it can to suppress the Bernie effect. Kinda lays bare their true colors. They'll sacrifice numbers in both chambers in order to keep their donors raking it in (and the donation tap wide open).

Bernie certainly has shown legs I didn't really think he had. That his campaign has shown such life gives one hope... but then you have to realize that the convention rules are still heavily weighted in favor of hilbillary. Bernie could win a fairly large plurality in delegates and STILL lose the nom, due largely to the "superdelegate" thing.

Could the Ds be lining up for another '68 convention? If hilbillary steals Bernie's rightful nom, will anyone bother to protest, or does everyone just expect this? And if/when hilbillary does become the nom, will all of Bernie's newly excited voters just disengage (again)... and how many more of the usual voters will join them in disgust?

If hilbillary is bought as the nom, and all those voters lose hope, will the Ds not only lose both chambers but also the white house? Would this be the definition of a pyrrhic victory?

And then there is the corporate vote-counting thing to consider. Like the weed vote in ohio, will there be obvious fraud in corporate vote counting? Will imbecile americans accept that fraud as legitimate without batting an eye? What will the corporate media do to distract everyone from the fact that they've all been screwed? Will even Bernie challenge it?


Post a Comment

<< Home