Honest question. No sarcasm.

[onecaliberal]

If we ALL vote blue no matter who the Democratic candidate is, how are we arguing that some are unelectable?

I have my favs to be sure, but I WILL unequivocally support whomever emerges from the primary.

Are we saying none of our candidates can win?

[RazBerryBeret]

1. Same here...

and Bloomberg is the only candidate I will have to hold my nose to vote for... all the others would be a win.

[TEB]

2. I agree with you on Bloomberg

[lapfog_1]

3. because "we" here in DU and "we" in the Democratic Base

are not a majority of the voters except in certain very BLUE states.

I have no fear that Sanders will lose in California or New York... and probably another dozen states we could all name.

That won't matter at all.

Sanders could win California by 3 Million voters (and probably will)... but that doesn't change the number of electors in the electoral college.

Our founders (in a compromise to the southern states) set us up with a system where it is possible for the clear election winner (and only for President) loses the election.

It has happened twice in my lifetime. I believe we are set up for a third time.

[stopbush]

26. Bingo!

[Corgigal]

28. Why doesn't people understand this?

If we don’t win 5 swing states. It’s over.

I retired to Kentucky. I see what a type of person can be on the Democratic ticket to win over independents and light republicans. We need base plus.

[texasfiddler]

29. You put into words my exact concerns

[Sloumeau]

4. First of all, we are not really sure if everyone will vote blue no matter who.

Second of all, general elections are not just about the Democrats. There are actually more independents than there are Democrats or Republicans. How the Independents, Democrats, and Republicans vote makes the difference in the general election.

Also, we don't know how many Democrats will just not vote, or how successful Republicans will be at voter suppression. We also don't know how successful Republicans will be at smearing our eventual nominee. There are just a lot of variables.

[onecaliberal]

8. I get the number of variables, but the country slipping to fascism kind of put it on another level.

This is not just any election and could well be the last election in America.

[W_HAMILTON]

11. We were warning of that in the last election.

That still didn't prevent certain people from sitting out the election and/or voting for a spoiler third party candidate in just enough numbers to throw the election to said fascist.

[onecaliberal]

12. Exactly. And now that the worst has happened. do these people not see.

[Turin_C3PO]

13. We already have people,

both moderates and progressives, who are threatening to sit out or write in their favorite candidate come Election Day. I hope it’s just comments posted in the heat of the moment. Otherwise, we’re screwed no matter who get the nomination.

[Demsrule86]

17. Not all moderate Democrats and certainly not Indies will vote for Sanders...sure political junkies

here at DU will...but that won't be enough. Sanders will not win a general. I would be delighted to be wrong should he be our nominee but I look at the numbers and see no possible way.

[ancianita]

5. Exactly. WE'RE the ones who make our candidate electable. Unity works exactly like that.

[Demsrule86]

18. I have heard that before...how we make any candidate electable only it is not nor ever was true.

[ancianita]

32. So who does, again?

[Fresh_Start]

6. because democrats are not the only people who vote

stanford study..polarizing candidate raises opposite party turnout more than same party turnout.

[Neon Gods]

16. Isn't Trump a polarizing candidate?

That Stanford study seems like good news for us.

[Fresh_Start]

22. no because the last time we had two polarizing candidates Clinton and Trump

the GOP won...so odds are the same thing will happen again with two polarizing candidates (sanders and trump). because... Democrats fall in love and Republicans fall in line

[Moderateguy]

23. Do you think any republican would consider Sanders as an alternative to Trump?

I can see Bloomberg or even Biden appealing to disgruntled republicans--Sanders absolutely not. Sanders stands for things that are anathema to republican voters.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

7. We will all vote Blue, I hope,

though I'm not so sure about some members of the Bernie cult (not on DU) who pulled the same shit in 2016. It's a tautology: a candidate is electable if people vote for him. The question is whether enough people will be motivated to vote for Bernie vs. Trump, or will they just think, "Fuck it, Trump is an asshole and Bernie is a socialist and I don't like either of them so I won't vote at all"?

[onecaliberal]

9. I know you're right but it's mind blowing that folks do not understand the dire situation we're

Facing. Leaving aside the question of Democracy, I’m afraid we are passed the point of doing anything to address the climate crisis. The survival of the human race on this planet worries me a lot.

[Fresh_Start]

10. beg them to at least vote for downticket races even if they can't stomach the pres race nt

nt

[Moderateguy]

24. NO--They need to hold their noses and vote for Bernie is he is the nominee

If republicans can do it so can we

[Fresh_Start]

25. if someone is no vote or vote only downticket.. then downticket is the better outcome

and there is a chance you can persuade someone that it has value.

[Arkansas Granny]

14. And therein lies the rub. Not all will vote for the Democratic nominee if

it isn't their favorite. I figure that even my least favorite is preferable to Trump, do if it comes to that, I'll hold my nose if I have to and vote blue.

[Hermit-The-Prog]

15. A question for door to door: Will you be the voter to save the world?

[Demsrule86]

19. No door to door for me this year except for the House races and I will phonebank in all nearby

states. It goes without saying that I will vote blue no matter who.

[NurseJackie]

21. You do know that there are more people OUTSIDE of this DU-bubble, right?

What we "pledge" amongst ourselves has very little to do with what's going to happen in the REAL WORLD.

Are we saying none of our candidates can win?

Just Bernie. He's the most vulnerable. He's the weakest when it comes to trying to win a national election. America will not elect a Socialist. It's never going to happen.

[Tommy_Carcetti]

27. The problem isn't us here at DU.

I don’t want Bernie to get the nomination but I will absolutely vote for him if he does. (Absent some ridiculous move on his part like naming Tulsi his VP choice)

The problem is for all of the people outside of DU who are more susceptible to slick framing and disingenuous attacks on a candidate. And the more potential vulnerabilities to a candidate—such as being an openly avowed socialist in a country conditioned to be afraid of socialism—the greater the risks and downsides.

[Hoyt]

30. I think the concern is white wingers will vote in droves for trump, and Independents -- who might

have voted Democratic in 2020 -- won't with Sanders heading ticket.

But, I agree that our best shot is clearly voting for the candidate who gets the nomination, even if we expect to turn off the disappointing election news early on Nov 3rd.

trump's supporters had to think he was going to lose in 2016, yet they voted and too many Democrats didn't.

I'm voting Democratic, even if resigned to losing.

[Codeine]

31. A portion of the electorate

has already made it clear they do not support Blue No Matter Who but are rather tied exclusively to a single candidate and the rest of us must #bendtheknee or they’ll sit out.