Sanders' 'narrow path' to victory gets even narrower

[RandySF]

A majority of the states and territories yet to vote rejected him in 2016. The national polls don’t offer much hope either — since Joe Biden defeated him in Arizona, Florida and Illinois on March 17, Sanders has trailed him by double-digits in every single national survey.

Days before the Wisconsin primary — the last major race on the presidential calendar for weeks — Whoopi Goldberg grilled Sanders on “The View,” pushing him to explain how he could still capture the nomination. He never spelled it out, instead arguing that “people in a democracy have a right to vote and have a right to vote for the agenda that they think can work for America, especially in this very, very difficult moment.”

Sanders' campaign manager, Faiz Shakir, and senior adviser, Jeff Weaver, have likewise declined to answer questions from POLITICO about what his path looks like. While it’s not yet mathematically impossible for him to win, Sanders would need to amass more than 60 percent of the remaining delegates to clinch the nomination — a mark he’s only hit in two states this year, Nevada and his home state of Vermont.

His path is so narrow that some of Sanders' senior aides have even advised him to consider dropping out, though not everyone in his inner circle feels the same way, according to people familiar with the situation.




https://www.politico.com/news/2020/04/05/bernie-sanders-path-to-victory-165161

[The Magistrate]

1. Narrow Enough, Sir, To Pass An N95 Mask

"From Bernie’s perspective, dropping out of a race once you have no chance of winning is peculiar behavior that can only be explained by the work of a hidden hand. For most politicians, though, it is actually standard operating procedure. Only Sanders seems to think the normal thing to do once voters have made clear they don’t want to nominate you is to continue campaigning anyway."





"When things are not called by their right names, what is said cannot make sense. When what is said does not make sense, what is planned cannot succeed. When plans do not succeed, people become uneasy. When people are uneasy, punishments do not fit crimes. When punishments do not fit crimes, people cannot know where to put hand or foot."

[philly_bob]

5. Who is the "hidden hand" behind Sanders' refusal to drop out?

You keep repeating that quote. Spell it out or stop making vague accusations!

[The Magistrate]

15. Shall We Walk Through This V-e-r-y Slowly, Sir?

Here is the quote:

"From Bernie’s perspective, dropping out of a race once you have no chance of winning is peculiar behavior that can only be explained by the work of a hidden hand. For most politicians, though, it is actually standard operating procedure. Only Sanders seems to think the normal thing to do once voters have made clear they don’t want to nominate you is to continue campaigning anyway."

The evident meaning of the first sentence is that Sanders finds leaving a contest you clearly cannot win is 'peculiar behavior' which requires some explanation, since in his view people just don't do that. The explanation Sanders proffered, for Sen. Klobuchar and Mr. Buttigeige halting their campaigns was that they had been pressured by the 'Democratic Establishment' to do so, and so he found himself in a head to head race with Mr. Biden owing to the 'hidden hand' of the 'Democratic Establishment'. The usage 'hidden hand' is a fairly common means of evoking the action of conspirators working behind the scenes out of sight. Since no one but Sanders could detect any reason but normal political behavior in the actions of the Senator and the Mayor, it was a 'hidden hand' indeed.

The second sentence builds on the first, noting that the actions of Sen. Klobuchar and Mr. Buttigeige are the normal actions of practicing politicians when they perceive themselves at great disadvantage in a campaign.

The third sentence builds on the first two. The first sentence, which establishes Sanders finds it peculiar two people who obviously had no chance to prevail ceased the contest, and then the second sentence which establishes this is in fact normal behavior for aspiring politicians at great disadvantage. From this, the author concludes reasonably that Sanders finds it normal to continue campaigning even after it is obvious you have been soundly rejected by the voting public, and draws the obvious further conclusion that what Sanders considers normal behavior is in fact pretty peculiar.

Now perhaps you can do me a small favor and state plainly what accusation you imagine me to be making, or that you suspect me to be making. Because the quoted statement seems abundantly clear to me. And that clear meaning comes nowhere near stating that some 'hidden hand' is behind Sanders refusing to end his campaign. The statement simply makes clear by a vivid usage that Sanders seems to believe he was conspired against, by the usual rogue's gallery of the 'Democratic Establishment' and its perfidious creature, the 'Democratic National Committee', who have evidently been balking Sanders' ambitions to lead a progressive revolution for some time now....






"When things are not called by their right names, what is said cannot make sense. When what is said does not make sense, what is planned cannot succeed. When plans do not succeed, people become uneasy. When people are uneasy, punishments do not fit crimes. When punishments do not fit crimes, people cannot know where to put hand or foot."

[philly_bob]

23. Let me get this straight.

In this OP and others you say "Sanders' behavior ... can only be explained by the work of a hidden hand."

You admit: "The usage 'hidden hand' is a fairly common means of evoking the action of conspirators working behind the scenes out of sight."

Yes. That's why I asked you to identify those conspirators.

But then you duck the issue and explain: "[My words] come[s] nowhere near stating that some 'hidden hand' is behind Sanders refusing to end his campaign. The statement [is] simply ... a vivid usage"

No hidden hand, no conspirators.

I suggest that for you to suggest there is a hidden hand behind Sanders and then, when pressed, saying your phrase was just a "vivid usage" is irresponsible.

And please, lose the superior, condescending attitude.

[The Magistrate]

34. It Does Not Seem You Are Capable Of Getting It Straight, Sir

I certainly see no reason to repeat my slow description of several plain sentences in straightforward English.

The writer points towards Sanders claiming a 'hidden hand' is working against his campaign, by having removed Sen. Klobuchar and Mr. Buttegeige from the race, so that he is left to face but one opponent, when he had hoped to face a field of several candidates throughout the primary. Sanders did in fact claim it was pressure from the 'Democratic Establishment' that altered the field against him, and seemed genuinely flustered that other politicians behaved as those who practice the trade generally do. He seems honestly to have expected all contenders would hang on till the last dog died, even when their hopes for success were in the 'zero to naught' range. It is what he does, and people do tend to judge others by themselves.

Should the above prove beyond your understanding, it is difficult to see what might suffice.





"From Bernie’s perspective, dropping out of a race once you have no chance of winning is peculiar behavior that can only be explained by the work of a hidden hand. For most politicians, though, it is actually standard operating procedure. Only Sanders seems to think the normal thing to do once voters have made clear they don’t want to nominate you is to continue campaigning anyway."






"When things are not called by their right names, what is said cannot make sense. When what is said does not make sense, what is planned cannot succeed. When plans do not succeed, people become uneasy. When people are uneasy, punishments do not fit crimes. When punishments do not fit crimes, people cannot know where to put hand or foot."

[philly_bob]

42. You persist in using the phrase "hidden hand" about Sanders?

The "hidden hand" phrase would ordinarily imply (in plain, non-Magisterial language) a conspiracy or conspirators.

But when challenged, you can not name the conspirators. You say there aren't any. The phrase is just "vivid usage."

Instead, you offer a freedom-of-association ramble through Primary 2020 chronology that you seem to think proves your point. On the question at hand -- whether you are justified in claiming that there is a "hidden hand" behind Sanders -- I find it unconvincing.

You close with your familiar Aristotelian note about calling things by their right names. Counsel which you ignore with your continued "vivid usage" of a phrase that implies dark conspiracy.

Sometimes I have found your rhetorical posture on DU amusing, Sir, but twice today you have insulted my intelligence.

[The Magistrate]

43. You Do A Fairly Good Imitation Of a Fool, Sir

"I would like to take you seriously, but that would be an affront to your intelligence."

[Thekaspervote]

16. It's rhetorical...

[DenverJared]

38. If the poster could define the "hidden hand" he would have done so

However, when a perplexing and illogical behavior is observed, conspiracies are inevitable.

The "hidden hand" may or may not exist and if it did exist it could be one or more of Jane Sanders, David Sirota, Nina Turner, Brihana Joy Grey, Donald Trump or even Vladimir Putin if one really wants to stretch the speculation or it could be none of the above and some other heretofore undefined parties.

[The Magistrate]

41. THis One Of The More Entertaining Idee Fixe To Yet Appear, Sir

Try and follow along, the thing is written in perfectly plain English, an excerpt from a piece by Mr. Chait in New York magazine, which provided headers for several discussion here some days ago....



"From Bernie’s perspective, dropping out of a race once you have no chance of winning is peculiar behavior that can only be explained by the work of a hidden hand. For most politicians, though, it is actually standard operating procedure. Only Sanders seems to think the normal thing to do once voters have made clear they don’t want to nominate you is to continue campaigning anyway."




The writer points towards Sanders claiming a 'hidden hand' is working against his campaign, by having removed Sen. Klobuchar and Mr. Buttegeige from the race, so that he is left to face but one opponent, when he had hoped to face a field of several candidates throughout the primary. Sanders did in fact claim it was pressure from the 'Democratic Establishment' that altered the field against him, and seemed genuinely flustered that other politicians behaved as those who practice the trade generally do. He seems honestly to have expected all contenders would hang on till the last dog died, even when their hopes for success were in the 'zero to naught' range. It is what he does, and people do tend to judge others by themselves.







"When things are not called by their right names, what is said cannot make sense. When what is said does not make sense, what is planned cannot succeed. When plans do not succeed, people become uneasy. When people are uneasy, punishments do not fit crimes. When punishments do not fit crimes, people cannot know where to put hand or foot."

[grantcart]

8. It's the size of an amoeba

[The Magistrate]

17. A Very Small One, Perhaps, Sir

"From Bernie’s perspective, dropping out of a race once you have no chance of winning is peculiar behavior that can only be explained by the work of a hidden hand. For most politicians, though, it is actually standard operating procedure. Only Sanders seems to think the normal thing to do once voters have made clear they don’t want to nominate you is to continue campaigning anyway."






"When things are not called by their right names, what is said cannot make sense. When what is said does not make sense, what is planned cannot succeed. When plans do not succeed, people become uneasy. When people are uneasy, punishments do not fit crimes. When punishments do not fit crimes, people cannot know where to put hand or foot."

[George II]

2. Not only every national poll but each and every individual state poll, too....

He's projected to lose every one of the remaining 27 primaries/caucuses. From 538 (Biden the first number, Sanders the second), here are the forecast delegates:

[liberalmediaaddict]

3. It would make life so much easier

If he would just drop out. With all the Covid anxiety and uncertainty it would be a relief to not have to worry about the primaries and know that Biden is definitely our nominee.
.
We need to focus on the general and attacking Trump. We don't have time for 6 more months spent debating Medicare For All. And we need to make sure people are going to be able to vote in November. Since the Republicans are going to do everything they can to lower turnout.

[Cha]

4. So "narrow" that Jeff Weaver advised BS to Drop out..

Beyond Shakir and Jayapal, longtime strategist Jeff Weaver has privately made a case that exiting the race more quickly and on good terms with Biden would give Sanders more leverage in the long run, according to one of the people; the other said Weaver has used a light touch in presenting his case. Weaver and Jayapal did not return calls and messages seeking comment. Shakir declined to comment.

https://upload.democraticunderground.com/1287696396

And, Larry David.. "It's no time to fool around here".

[George II]

7. Of Turner, Sirota, Gray, and Weaver, the only one not drawing a salary is Weaver.

[Cha]

9. I thought BS re-hired him?

[George II]

10. I think he's an "unpaid adviser", he doesn't show up in his expenditures. Maybe he's getting paid...

....through a third-party, like an ad buying agency.

Most of his top vendors are LLCs, which aren't required to reveal most of their financial records.

[grantcart]

13. I am guessing he is paid through a consultant contract

Weaver has been on paid staff positions since 86 including his Congressional staff

Could be ad buying, but no one is going to match Ted Devine take down of Bernie who pocketed $ 10- 15 million last time around on ad buys.

[Cha]

14. I'm guessing JW is getting paid some way.. and in the beginning

expected a sweet WH gig coming his way..

[nolawarlock]

11. Surely they can all get by on the $600 Covid stipend.

Well, I doubt that's what they're making now but if that's the reason they want him to stay in the race, how utterly selfish.

[sheshe2]

6. Good.

Time to drop out as soon as Wisconsin is done voting.

That is all she wrote.

[PubliusEnigma]

26. It was time to drop out when Michigan soundly rejected Bernie.

[sheshe2]

31. Agreed.

However I will give him Wisconsin and then he gives he concession speech.

He does not, then all my questions will be answered.

[Tetrachloride]

12. Where to spend my vote

1. Tried and true Joe Biden

2. Any other candidate at this point: throwing money and votes down the drain.

Not withdrawing immediately shows a decline of Bernie's character day by day.

[peggysue2]

18. When you have the likes of Cenk Uygur saying it's time to pivot . . .

then it's time to exit gracefully. Hanging on in defeat is not a good look nor is it constructive to the most important goal of all--thrashing Trump and his odious enablers in November.

The more time wasted on Bernie discussions or Sanders' supporters angst and/or those supporters' wobbly voting record, the more tick-tock energy is pulled from focusing on Donald Trump's disastrous, criminal presidency.

Friday night, The Donald dumped the IG, a retaliatory action most journalists reported. But what was in the investigative pipeline? The scuttlebutt is that there are/were whistleblowers on the current mismanagement and grifting related to Trump's Covid-19 response. Does anyone doubt that Donald Trump would do anything possible to prevent another scandal exploding in his orange face??

The only thing that matters is ridding ourselves of this pox named Trump. All this back and forth motion on Sanders is irrelevant to reaching that goal.

If Sanders could put aside his ego, he would drop out now. You know, for the sake of the country. I'll give the Senator from Vermont the benefit of the doubt after Wisconsin's results come in. His last chance is then.

That being said, I'm not feeling confident.

[BidenBacker]

19. It's damn odd

that Bernie likes to go around claiming he knows when this or that war can't be won...yet can't even seem to recognize when his own personal battle is lost.

I just googled "can't see the forest for the trees" and what came back was "see Sanders 2020 campaign".

[LizBeth]

20. Sanders lost. He does not have a path. I won't pretend he does. Get out. Back Biden 100%.

Get it done. This is not a game. The cost is high. Lives are at stake.

[BidenBacker]

21. I'm a little confused about Wisconsin

Federal judge orders Wisconsin clerks to wait until April 13 to release results of Tuesday's election

https://www.jsonline.com/story/news/politics/elections/2020/04/03/wisconsin-cant-release-election-results-until-april-13-judge-rules/2940768001/

Is this where we stand right now...we won't hear any results until the 13th?

[blue-wave]

25. Here's what I know

And I don't know all the details, but holding results until the 13th has something to do with absentee ballots. The republicans were putting up road blocks to stop people from voting absentee. A judge extended the deadline date for receipt of absentee ballots. The judge also changed (eased) some of the restrictions on absentees making it easier for people to vote absentee. This can actually help the Democrats.

Last I read, there were over one million absentee ballots already received by Wisconsin election authorities.

[BidenBacker]

28. Thanks a lot for the explanation, blue

Not sure why the Republicans would try to block absentee voting in a Democratic primary...but almost nothing Goppers do any more makes much sense to me so I gave up a long time ago. Appreciate the response.

[blue-wave]

30. They don't want Joe to be the nominee

[blue-wave]

32. I just remembered

It also involves the Wisconsin Supreme Court up for election on Tuesday. From what I gather in the link, the seat for Wisconsin Supreme Court is elected on Tuesday by voters from all parties in a general election. I'm not from Wisconsin so I'm not familiar with their process, but a Wisconsin Supreme Court seat will be decided on Tuesday. The republicans presently have a majority on the court and the democrats are fighting like heck to close the gap.

https://www.ballotpedia.org/Wisconsin_Supreme_Court_elections,_2020

[BidenBacker]

35. OK

Makes a little more sense now why Pubbies took such an interest in what I thought was a purely Democratic affair. So it boils down to normal routine Republicans trying to reduce turnout. Yawn...same ol, same ol.

I saw a headline earlier today about Biden endorsing that Karofsky gal and that her opponent Kelly ran some "misleading" ads against her. Yet another "so what's new?" yawner. Based on an earlier primary for that SC seat looks like maybe an uphill battle for her.

In the February 18 primary, Kelly received 50.1% of the vote to Karofsky's 37.2%

WI sure has been getting on my nerves the last few years...LOL.

[Gothmog]

22. The primary is over

Link to tweet

?s=20

[George II]

24. Sanders' path to the nomination:

[blue-wave]

27. The fact that

Bernie doesn't have enough common sense to drop out is reason enough to conclude that he is not presidential material. It's over Bernie!! Come home to reality.

[Blue Owl]

29. Narrower than Hank Hill's urethra

I tell you what...

[empedocles]

33. It is hard to imagine Dems supporting BS as their nominee. If somehow JB 'disappears',

something like 80% of Dems will find 'anyone but BS'!

[BidenBacker]

36. What are you saying?

That Bernie's a propane progressive?

Quick, somebody light a match!

[Crutches]

39. Very sad

He should withdraw.

[la-trucker]

40. Narrow path with a dead end