Democrats 2020

[ZiprHead]

Bernie Sanders was the roll call amendment king from 1995 to 2007

Bernie Sanders is often criticized for "pie-in-the-sky" proposals and impractical ideals, but his campaign argues the Vermont senator actually gets things done.

"Bernie Sanders passed more roll call amendments in a Republican Congress than any other member," according to a TV ad paid for by the Sanders campaign.

A version of this ad appears on Sanders’ YouTube channel, and Sanders has made this claim on Twitter and Facebook as well so we wondered if it was true.

The Sanders campaign didn’t get back to us, but we found that this carefully worded statement is accurate for his earlier years in Congress.

The ‘amendment king’

Sanders served in the House of Representatives from 1991 to 2006 and has been in the Senate since then. Republicans were in control of the House from 1995 to 2007 and of the Senate from 2015 to present.

In 2005, Rolling Stone named Sanders the "amendment king" of the House. At the time, the title held true with a specific qualification: amendments agreed to by record votes. (Amendments can also be passed with voice votes, in which the volume of yeas and nays dictates passage, or by unanimous consent, in which no one raises an objection.)

Out of 419 amendments Sanders sponsored over his 25 years in Congress, 90 passed, 21 of them by roll call votes. Here’s a breakdown (bold indicates Republican Congresses):

 

[southernhybrid]

Real Clear Politics

Sanders - 49.7%
Trump - 45.3%

Sanders by 4.4%

Ruling out Sanders vs Trumpo The Clown at this point is merely wishful thinking.

I'm not ruling him out, but the polls are all over the place from day to day, and I haven't seen any that break things down by the states. As we all know, it's not the popular vote that wins presidential elections, it's the idiotic electoral college. The way Trump has been acting this week, gives me a bit more hope that most anyone can beat him. He's enraged because the stock market is tanking due to the coronavirus scare, and blaming the news media for reporting too much info about it. He's saying that SCOTUS justices who don't agree with him should recuse themselves, and he's purging officials who criticize him. That's even more autocratic than some of the things he did prior to the impeachment hearings.

The only problem is that most people don't follow the details of these things like we do, or they get all of their news from very dubious sources. Plus, there are people like some who I know that are so upset about the rise of Sanders, and they are threatening not to vote. One of my close black friends told me today that her husband says he won't vote if Sanders is the nominee. I'm going to try and help her find a way to convince him that Trump is far worse, so he will vote. I can't reach too many people but everyone who realizes the danger of a second Trump term, should reach out to friends that might not vote if Sanders is officially the nominee. There is always one candidate who is far better or far worst than the other one. We all must come to terms with that.

 

[Treedbear]

I think Biden looked better to SC voters simply because he tried to maintain some decorum and didn't jump on the dogpile with the others. At times it was quite embarassing to be a Democrat. The worst instance was when Sanders had the floor and Pete kept tryinmg to talk over him and neither of them would back down for a good 20 seconds. The moderators completely lost control. And also Warren insisting she jusy had to get into the details of Bloomberg's NDAs. She lost some cred on that because it starts looking like a vendetta. But there was far too much rudeness and so Biden looked at least somewhat more sane. Nobody even noticed the "150 million" brain fart.

 

[PyramidHead]

I think Biden looked better to SC voters simply because he tried to maintain some decorum and didn't jump on the dogpile with the others. At times it was quite embarassing to be a Democrat. The worst instance was when Sanders had the floor and Pete kept tryinmg to talk over him and neither of them would back down for a good 20 seconds. The moderators completely lost control. And also Warren insisting she jusy had to get into the details of Bloomberg's NDAs. She lost some cred on that because it starts looking like a vendetta. But there was far too much rudeness and so Biden looked at least somewhat more sane. Nobody even noticed the "150 million" brain fart.

Here's what was said, Pete is truly an Obama-level orator of eloquence and grace

 

[Xoxarle1]

Not sure I put much faith in head-to-head polling at this early stage. If Sanders emerges as the winner, he's going to be truly pummelled by corporate and PAC ad spend. It will be Bloomberg on steriods. The following industries, already some of the most powerful lobbyists in DC, will see him as an existential threat: Big Pharma, Wall Street, Silicon Valley, Oil And Gas, Health Insurers, Hospital Chains, Banks, Defense Contractors. They would likely only need to move the needle by 5 percent points. Bloomberg has moved it 15 points by spending half a billion. You can't tell me those industries couldn't amass a warchest 10 or even 100 times that size.

 

[blastula]

I don't think that Sanders will lose Florida over this one casual comment. What he said is true. Not everything that Communists have done has been bad. Cubans are highly educated and have made some considerable advances in medical care. However, it was a comment that could, and will, be taken out of context and used against him. He really needs to avoid putting himself in the role of a salesman for socialism. He should do more to explain what has been wrong with these regimes, and I think he is starting to realize that. He should do more to tie Trump to the dictators that Trump has cozied up to.

He is in a tough spot, because many of his supporters are aware of the truth about Castro(which is that he was a hero to Cuba and one of the greatest people who ever lived), but he is running for the president of a settler-colonial empire that is committed to snuffing out socialist countries and painting their leaders as despots. The American left doesn't want to confront that yet and just wants comfortable socialism within its own borders. If Bernie fails to enact his reforms due to the institutional barriers that will be placed in his way, my hope is that the left will become radicalized by this and rethink their indoctrination about Cuba, the USSR, and other places where socialism is being built. But now isn't the time for that conversation, as most of the comments on this forum demonstrate.

Have you gone full tankie?

 

[Treedbear]

I think Biden looked better to SC voters simply because he tried to maintain some decorum and didn't jump on the dogpile with the others. At times it was quite embarassing to be a Democrat. The worst instance was when Sanders had the floor and Pete kept tryinmg to talk over him and neither of them would back down for a good 20 seconds. The moderators completely lost control. And also Warren insisting she jusy had to get into the details of Bloomberg's NDAs. She lost some cred on that because it starts looking like a vendetta. But there was far too much rudeness and so Biden looked at least somewhat more sane. Nobody even noticed the "150 million" brain fart.

Here's what was said, Pete is truly an Obama-level orator of eloquence and grace

[/ATTACH=CONFIG]26327[/ATTACH]

Wow! Thanks for that. I couldn't understand any of it.

 

[Xoxarle1]

I think Biden looked better to SC voters simply because he tried to maintain some decorum and didn't jump on the dogpile with the others. At times it was quite embarassing to be a Democrat. The worst instance was when Sanders had the floor and Pete kept tryinmg to talk over him and neither of them would back down for a good 20 seconds. The moderators completely lost control. And also Warren insisting she jusy had to get into the details of Bloomberg's NDAs. She lost some cred on that because it starts looking like a vendetta. But there was far too much rudeness and so Biden looked at least somewhat more sane. Nobody even noticed the "150 million" brain fart.

Biden's jump from a 4 to 10 point lead in SC these past few days is likely undecideds breaking to him, some slight movement to him from candidates other than Sanders (who is maintaining a 20-ish poll rating), a strong-ish debate last night and Clyburn's endorsement. Not sure how delegates are awarded, but if just straight up vote counts, Biden likely gets only 6 or 7 more than Sanders. CA is looming next week, with Sanders showing a substantial lead at this point, double that of Biden. He could net 55-60 more delegates than Biden. Not sure where anyone claws much of that back anywhere else. Sanders is ahead slightly in TX, and hanging with Warren in MA. The debate last night was a mess, but I'm not seeing any kind of media narrative around Sanders getting holed under the water line today. NYT even had him slightly the winner, by averaging their pundit ratings, and the NYT is by no means in his corner.

 

[ZiprHead]

Not sure I put much faith in head-to-head polling at this early stage. If Sanders emerges as the winner, he's going to be truly pummelled by corporate and PAC ad spend. It will be Bloomberg on steriods. The following industries, already some of the most powerful lobbyists in DC, will see him as an existential threat: Big Pharma, Wall Street, Silicon Valley, Oil And Gas, Health Insurers, Hospital Chains, Banks, Defense Contractors. They would likely only need to move the needle by 5 percent points. Bloomberg has moved it 15 points by spending half a billion. You can't tell me those industries couldn't amass a warchest 10 or even 100 times that size.

Never before in all our history have these forces been so united against one candidate as they stand today. They are unanimous in their hate for me—and I welcome their hatred. - FDR

 

[TV and credit cards]

"It's a hard no," Weaver told NBC News after Tuesday night's debate. "Bernie has said he's going to fund his presidential campaign with small-dollar contributions, and I think we can do that. I think we can raise over a billion dollars in small-dollar contributions."

Because being a seventy eight year old socialist and having a heart attack while campaigning just doesn’t quite do it.

 

[Xoxarle1]

Not sure I put much faith in head-to-head polling at this early stage. If Sanders emerges as the winner, he's going to be truly pummelled by corporate and PAC ad spend. It will be Bloomberg on steriods. The following industries, already some of the most powerful lobbyists in DC, will see him as an existential threat: Big Pharma, Wall Street, Silicon Valley, Oil And Gas, Health Insurers, Hospital Chains, Banks, Defense Contractors. They would likely only need to move the needle by 5 percent points. Bloomberg has moved it 15 points by spending half a billion. You can't tell me those industries couldn't amass a warchest 10 or even 100 times that size.

Never before in all our history have these forces been so united against one candidate as they stand today. They are unanimous in their hate for me—and I welcome their hatred. - FDR

I wonder how FDR would have fared in 1936 if his opponents had the ability to paste every billboard and swamp every radio with slogans or soundbites about him coming for their bibles, guns, paychecks, flags and unborn babies. It's a little easier to welcome hatred in an era where mass communication is in its infancy and the gatekeepers aren't quite so eager to allow outright slander. Remember, Zuckerberg has no financial incentive whatsoever to stem the flow of anti-progressive propaganda, considering their threats to regulate his company.

 

[angelo]

Living in Perth Western Australia, I can only get snippets of the clowns debates. But what I did see so far are far better comedy that's on the idiot box now, or has been since the days of Seinfeld and Friends.

 

[Elixir]

Living in Perth Western Australia, I can only get snippets of the clowns debates. But what I did see so far are far better comedy that's on the idiot box now, or has been since the days of Seinfeld and Friends.

I guess you totally miss the real entertainment - like Cheato's "press conference" yesterday:

Cheato: "I am pleased to present the world's greatest medical experts because the democrats caused the stock market crash and you need to re-elect me. There isn't going to be any covid-19 in the US and we almost have a vaccine. Now, here are my experts - give 'em a big hand, folks!"
Expert 1: "It is certain that Covid-19 will spread in the US, it's just a matter of when and how much." (At that moment another network is announcing a case in rural CA where the infected person never traveled, so must have contracted it locally)
Expert 2: "We are at least a year and a half from having a vaccine"
Cheato: "Thank you all, and remember: if anything bad happens, it was the Democrats, and that's why I defunded the cdc, eliminated the Whitehouse pandemic response team and the NS health threat mitigation systems - we don't need them, as these illustrious experts have told you. Now go home, don't worry, and ignore everything anyone but me tells you about it because I know more about epidemiology than the epidemiologists!"

Now THAT's entertainment! Too bad you missed it angelo.

 

[Politesse]

Oh, and the kicker: Mike Pence is now in charge of our pandemic response.

But the other point is also true. The debates have been clown shows.

 

[lpetrich]

Living in Perth Western Australia, I can only get snippets of the clowns debates. But what I did see so far are far better comedy that's on the idiot box now, or has been since the days of Seinfeld and Friends.

You may be able to find the full videos of the debates in places like YouTube. Dig deeper.

What Defines The Sanders Coalition? | FiveThirtyEight

Sen. Bernie Sanders’s coalition isn’t that big, at least not right now — he won about a quarter of Democratic primary voters in Iowa and New Hampshire, plus about a third of the first-alignment vote in Nevada,1 and about a quarter to a third of Democratic voters say they support him in most state and national polls. But Sanders’s backers are worth understanding because of what they’ve accomplished: making a democratic socialist who is not officially a Democrat the front-runner to lead the Democratic Party, over the objections of virtually all of the party’s establishment and many of its voters.

But his opposition is divided, and his opponents are rumored to be talking about some of them quitting so as to get a candidate with more voter support.

His base is younger voters and the very liberal

He won Latinos, but his coalition is multiracial

Many of his backers don’t have a college degree

It’s hard to say how much income matters

...
Second, looking at Sanders’s support helps explain his tensions with the Democratic Party establishment. Very liberal Democrats, those under 45, those without degrees and those with incomes below $50,000 represent a substantial portion of the Democratic electorate — enough to basically lift a candidate like Sanders to the top of the polls (especially in a field as crowded as this one). But most establishment Democrats don’t fit into any of those categories.

 

[PyramidHead]

I don't think that Sanders will lose Florida over this one casual comment. What he said is true. Not everything that Communists have done has been bad. Cubans are highly educated and have made some considerable advances in medical care. However, it was a comment that could, and will, be taken out of context and used against him. He really needs to avoid putting himself in the role of a salesman for socialism. He should do more to explain what has been wrong with these regimes, and I think he is starting to realize that. He should do more to tie Trump to the dictators that Trump has cozied up to.

He is in a tough spot, because many of his supporters are aware of the truth about Castro(which is that he was a hero to Cuba and one of the greatest people who ever lived), but he is running for the president of a settler-colonial empire that is committed to snuffing out socialist countries and painting their leaders as despots. The American left doesn't want to confront that yet and just wants comfortable socialism within its own borders. If Bernie fails to enact his reforms due to the institutional barriers that will be placed in his way, my hope is that the left will become radicalized by this and rethink their indoctrination about Cuba, the USSR, and other places where socialism is being built. But now isn't the time for that conversation, as most of the comments on this forum demonstrate.

Have you gone full tankie?

Where have you been? Yes!

 

[lpetrich]

Why The Establishment Can’t Bank On ‘Moderate’ Voters Consolidating Against Sanders | FiveThirtyEight

It might seem like “moderate” voters could consolidate behind one alternative to thwart Sanders’s path to the nomination. That’s possible, but one thing it assumes is that voters understand politics in ideological terms. And many don’t — political scientists have long found that most of the public does not fit into neat ideological boxes.

Rather, people often hold conflicting opinions on policy issues.

Often supporting some of one party's platform and supporting some of the other party's platform. Right-libertarians agree with the Democratic Party on social issues and the Republican Party on economic issues, thus the joke that they are Republicans who smoke pot.

Until recently, ideology played a limited role in American public opinion because the parties themselves were not that distinguishable on matters of ideology. In 1956, Americans could identify the party nominees’ positions on an issue and had a position on it themselves only 31 percent of the time. But by 2012 that number had risen to 77 percent. Likewise, the percentage of Americans that said they saw important differences between the parties rose, from 50 percent in 1952 to 83 percent in 2016.

So there might not be much of a middle left.

 

[fromderinside]

Moderate (middle) isn't determining anything. Trump took health care away from middle income voters and now we're on the edge of a recession. Those factors will determine the people who will vote against the idiot.

 

[J842P]

Why The Establishment Can’t Bank On ‘Moderate’ Voters Consolidating Against Sanders | FiveThirtyEight

It might seem like “moderate” voters could consolidate behind one alternative to thwart Sanders’s path to the nomination. That’s possible, but one thing it assumes is that voters understand politics in ideological terms. And many don’t — political scientists have long found that most of the public does not fit into neat ideological boxes.

Rather, people often hold conflicting opinions on policy issues.

Often supporting some of one party's platform and supporting some of the other party's platform. Right-libertarians agree with the Democratic Party on social issues and the Republican Party on economic issues, thus the joke that they are Republicans who smoke pot.

Until recently, ideology played a limited role in American public opinion because the parties themselves were not that distinguishable on matters of ideology. In 1956, Americans could identify the party nominees’ positions on an issue and had a position on it themselves only 31 percent of the time. But by 2012 that number had risen to 77 percent. Likewise, the percentage of Americans that said they saw important differences between the parties rose, from 50 percent in 1952 to 83 percent in 2016.

So there might not be much of a middle left.

The other thing to keep in mind is that Sanders frequently polls well as a second choice candidate, even for Bloomberg supporters (although he comes second there), but does poorly with Buttigieg supporters (who are all old anyway, so that isn't shocking). But he still tops the second choice for Warren and Biden.

 

[J842P]

Moderate (middle) isn't determining anything. Trump took health care away from middle income voters and now we're on the edge of a recession. Those factors will determine the people who will vote against the idiot.

People think that "independents" are "moderate". They aren't.