Nonprofit, nonpartisan journalism. Supported by readers.

Donate

Biden wins Minnesota Democratic primary

Former Vice President Joe Biden
REUTERS/Mike Blake
Former Vice President Joe Biden speaking at his Super Tuesday night rally in Los Angeles, California.

Before Tuesday, the question for Democratic presidential candidate Sen. Bernie Sanders was whether he could transfer the strength he showed four years ago in Minnesota’s caucuses to the state’s new primary format. Could the candidate with the best grassroots operation and the most enthusiastic supporters — a premium in organizing 4,000-plus precinct caucuses — be as successful among the larger primary electorate? 

He couldn’t. In an upset, former Vice President Joe Biden won Minnesota by a decisive margin. With 94.6 percent of precincts reporting, Biden led with 38.6 percent of the vote. Sanders had 29.9 percent. 

Biden, with a minuscule state operation, benefited from the popularity of U.S. Sen. Amy Klobuchar, who decided to drop out of the presidential race a day before the primary and endorse the former vice president. 

Biden not only won the state, he also finished first in almost every congressional district, which Democrats use as a way to allocate most of the 76 delegates to the party’s nominating convention. Of the 49 delegates decided by congressional district voting, Biden won 26, Sanders 18 and Warren 5. The other 26 delegates are decided by statewide results. The final total for all delegates was Biden 38, Sanders 27 and Warren 10.

Former New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg did not reach the 15 percent threshold needed under Democratic Party rules to get any delegates.

The Klobuchar effect

In a primary season that has been subject to weekly and even daily momentum swings, the four days between the South Carolina primary and Super Tuesday balloting were decisive. They included a big Biden win in South Carolina and decisions by both Klobuchar and former South Bend, Ind. Mayor Pete Buttigieg to drop out of the race and endorse Biden.

When the Associated Press called Minnesota for Biden Tuesday night, Corey Day, the campaign’s senior advisor in Minnesota, credited Klobuchar. “We had a great day today here,” the former executive director of the state DFL said. “We’re going to send Trump out of the White House.”

Biden called Klobuchar, who was at home in Minneapolis Tuesday night, to thank her for her support, said Justin Buoen, Klobuchar’s campaign manager. He noted a recent Minnesota poll showed Klobuchar winning her home state, with Sanders behind and Biden trailing. “I think Amy put him over the top here in Minnesota,” he said. Klobuchar will continue to campaign with Biden.

The vote from the Twin Cities illustrated Biden’s unexpected strength.

Corey Day, middle, celebrating after Minnesota is called for former Vice President Joe Biden.
MinnPost photo by Walker Orenstein
Corey Day, middle, celebrating after Minnesota is called for former Vice President Joe Biden.
Though Sanders won the 5th Congressional District, which encompasses all of Minneapolis and several first-ring suburbs, the margin was such that he will get four of the district’s 10 delegates while Biden will get three, as will Elizabeth Warren.

In the 4th Congressional District, which includes St. Paul and its eastern suburbs, Biden easily defeated Sanders and Warren. The 4th and 5th are the only two congressional districts where Warren won enough support to garner any delegates, though she will get some of the statewide delegate allocation if her numbers hold.

Biden won everywhere else — in the Twin Cities suburbs and in Greater Minnesota. He did so with support from both longtime fans and from voters who decided late or switched from other candidates, perhaps at the urging of Klobuchar and Buttigieg.

Latrice Winston, a Brooklyn Park resident who works in health care, voted for Biden and supported him throughout the primary because she thought the former vice president has a good chance of beating Trump. Health care, housing and education were issues for Winston, but her support for Biden went beyond the policy. “I like his personality,” Winston said. “I like his energy.”

State Rep. Dan Wolgamott
MinnPost photo by Walker Orenstein
State Rep. Dan Wolgamott
Asia Givens, a Minneapolis resident and mental health professional who attended the Biden election night party at Elsie’s in Northeast Minneapolis, said she was undecided until yesterday. But after research and watching debates, she settled on Biden as the candidate who was most likely to beat Trump and, “bring both Republicans and Democrats together.” She called Sanders a “visionary” who has some policies she supports, but she said he “doesn’t have a clear plan” to get those policies through Congress.

State Rep. Dan Wolgamott, a St. Cloud DFLer who originally supported Klobuchar, quickly endorsed Biden once Klobuchar left the race. He said Biden could “restore America’s name and standing throughout the world.”

Wolgamott was nearly prevented from voting for Biden. He had left the state Capitol to vote on Monday when he learned Klobuchar had dropped out. “If she would have decided like an hour later I would have had my vote locked in,” he said.

Wolgamott, who represents a swing district in the Legislature, said Biden would better help Democratic candidates win “up and down the ballot.” 

Many centrist Democrats across the country have raised concern Sanders could hurt the party in congressional and legislative races. “I don’t have to wonder how Joe Biden does in my district because he’s won it in the past — more than once,” Wolgamott said, referring to Biden’s time on the presidential ticket with Barack Obama.

Rita and Larry Nelson, two retirees from Fridley, initially supported Klobuchar but decided over the weekend to support Biden because they didn’t believe Klobuchar was as likely to win the nomination. “She made our decision a lot easier (by dropping out), but we were voting for Biden anyway,” Larry Nelson said.

Disappointment among Sanders supporters

At BlackStack Brewing in Midway-Hamline in St. Paul on Tuesday night, Cindy Yang of Brooklyn Park gathered with other Sanders supporters. “I really thought Minnesota was purple in the presidential 2016 election, and I think we’re showing up just as purple in this primary, and I think it’ll turn out purple again in the general,” she said. 

The results surprised her, and she worried about the process. “To have Klobuchar do what she did to the state. It was just really unfair,” she said. “I’m not happy with the establishment, the Democrats. I’m not happy with how they’ve rigged the system over and over again.”

Ruth Fen, a graphic designer and landlord in Minneapolis, said Sanders’ approach to health care and the environment are why she supported him. “It’s everything. I just think he’s got so much conviction… He’s not doing it for the power or anything.”

Malachy Zamacona, from St. Paul, just graduated from Hamline University and works for the census. While he said he was disappointed with the results, he said he would support Biden if he won the nomination. “Whomever the Democratic nominee is will get my vote; I would just be more excited if it was Bernie.

Supporters of Sen. Bernie Sanders
MinnPost photo by Bill Kelley
Supporters of Sen. Bernie Sanders convened at Blackstack Brewing in St. Paul Tuesday night to follow the returns.
“Biden does have a lot of black supporters behind him, which is a big thing to turn out that vote,” he said. “And I feel like most of Bernie’s supporters would support Biden, whereas I don’t think a lot of Biden supporters would come and support Bernie. So I think that would be one thing to consider.”

Sey Lee, a research coordinator in the Twin Cities, said she backs Sanders even though many of her family members supported Andrew Yang. “I think, for me, what’s fundamental about his campaign is his understanding that the system itself, the way that it’s set up, historically, and how it continues to be, is to disenfranchise the working class, people of color, Hmong people, refugees.”

Republicans held a primary Tuesday too. But with President Trump the only candidate on the ballot, he won 97.6 percent of the vote. And with a winner-take-all format, he will be awarded all 36 delegates at stake. 

It’s a bit more complicated on the Democratic Party side. Not only are there lots of candidates, but the delegate allocation rules have two attributes the GOP doesn’t. First, candidates must win at least 15 percent of the vote to win any delegates. And the eight congressional districts each have separate allocations, which also require a 15 percent threshold.

If a nominee isn’t selected on the first ballot, Democrats turn to the 750 so-called automatic delegates (what were called Super Delegates in 2016). Minnesota has 16 automatic delegates include former Vice President Walter Mondale, Gov. Tim Walz, the Democratic members of the congressional delegation as well as party officers and national committee members. They are not pledged to any candidate.

MinnPost staff writers Jessica Lee, Greta Kaul and Walker Orenstein contributed to this report. 

Comments (112)

  1. Submitted by Matt Haas on 03/04/2020 - 01:22 am.

    So it goes, and into November we slink, with a rousing, meh.

    • Submitted by William Hunter Duncan on 03/04/2020 - 10:52 am.

      More like, a fascinating epic fight at the convention, elite machinations putting Biden on top, then the specter of Biden dismantled in the debates with Trump, and the meltdown of Dem elite blaming Biden’s weakness on Bernie and Russia. Now that is entertainment!

  2. Submitted by Pat Terry on 03/04/2020 - 01:35 am.

    Wait, how was the system rigged? Because your candidate didn’t win?

    If you attack all the other candidates as being part of the “democratic establishment,” don’t be too surprised when those candidates endorse someone else when they drop out.

    • Submitted by William Hunter Duncan on 03/04/2020 - 09:36 am.

      Well, when you are working poor in America, the whole bloody system is rigged against you.

      So yeah, the Dem elite, more focused on beating Bernie than they are on Trump, offering up nothing even resembling policy, just a Dem elite prescribed “electibility”, and a return to the oh so great for corporations, banks and billionaire Obama and Clinton Admin’s…everything looks like a rigged racket…

      • Submitted by Solly Johnson on 03/04/2020 - 01:25 pm.

        Establishment Democrats are more focused on Sanders than Trump, since Trump is ideologically closer to them. On foreign policy the two parties are virtually the same with the Democrats overwhelmingly voting in favor of an obscene military budget, while at the same time hypocritically saying Trump is dangerous. With all the nonsense we hear about Russia, on foreign policy Joe McCarthy would feel at home in the Democratic Party if he were alive today.

      • Submitted by Edward Blaise on 03/04/2020 - 06:29 pm.

        Your pervasive negativity and hopelessness is both unrelenting and far from the truth. A few basic facts:

        MINNESOTA POPULATION 5.61M

        MEDIAN AGE 38.2

        MEDIAN HOUSEHOLD INCOME $70,315, 2.82% GROWTH

        POVERTY RATE 10.5%

        NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES 2.84M

        MEDIAN PROPERTY VALUE $235,400, 5.09% GROWTH

        I can agree that reducing the 10.5% poverty rate should be a priority. And the frequent MINNPOST articles on career education, family services and early childhood development are signs of progress.

        Having a President who will basically only have Trumpian executive orders to affect any change as the solution is ridiculous.

        For Bernie to run an ad showing his ability to cosponsor a bi-partisan veterans benefit bill as evidence how he can create Medicare for All is equally ridiculous.

        Four more years of Trump and you can go visit pollinators at the zoo, but not many other places.

        The Biden = Trump crowd were last seen posing as the Bush = Gore crowd. 400,000 Dead would disagree with your wisdom if they could,

        • Submitted by Matt Haas on 03/04/2020 - 11:37 pm.

          The combined net worth of the 400 richest Americans is 2.9 TRILLION dollars. The equal of about 41 and a half million of your median households, were it possible for each to be figured to the exact dollar. Nothing in the centrist playbook even desires to do anything to address this disparity, in fact, you seem to think its A OK. I know you think we just want stuff for free, that we’re just lazy, coddled. But you are incorrect. NO ONE is worthy of that obscene wealth, no one is worthy of the power it conveys, because it corrupts the fabric of society, destroys the ability the populace to even hope for a better future. You live in an aristocracy, and you don’t even understand that fact, so inured have you become to the idea that you no longer even see fighting against it as right and good. You’ve bought hook, line, and sinker that the idea of Utopia (clever codger that named it that, ensuring his bias would forever be mentioned) is unattainable, because someone told you once that it is. Now, you’re so enthralled in that mind trap that even the idea of trying to obtain it disgusts and repels you, you believe that there is some lesson to be taught by suffering and misery beyond that it hurts everyone it touches. You actual think such a mindset makes you “pragmatic and rational”, it is, quite honestly, astonishing.

        • Submitted by William Hunter Duncan on 03/05/2020 - 08:53 am.

          A poverty rate of 10%? When the measure of poverty is $26,200 for a family of four, which is one job at $13/hr, then in reality about 40%+ of Americans are barely getting by…

          As for pollinator collapse, the bellweather Monarch migration collapsec 90%….during Obama’s presidency. Trump has not helped, likely made it worse, but like poverty, you don’t get to lay that only at the feet of Trump and Republicans.

  3. Submitted by joe smith on 03/04/2020 - 07:13 am.

    Not sure it was a Klobuchar bump as much as it was a realization that Bernie Sanders is a socialist to his core. Bernie continuing to praise Fidel Castro was the last straw for most Democrats and by default, voted for Biden. I find it interesting that the Progressive Left has 3 old white men left in the race. Both Biden and Bernie have become millionaires without having a private sector job, both are career “public service” politicians, who says politics doesn’t pay? The third white guy is a Republican billionaire…… Can’t make it up.

    • Submitted by Edward Blaise on 03/04/2020 - 08:10 am.

      What can’t be made up is unfailing allegiance to the other old white guy in the final race, who would be far richer if he just took the money Daddy gave him, invested it with Charles Schwab and spent the next 60 years exclusively golfing and chasing women and not teetering from one bankruptcy to the next leaving behind a swamp of unpaid creditors and defrauded customers….

      • Submitted by joe smith on 03/04/2020 - 08:54 am.

        My favorite new dilemma of the Left is President Trump having the guts to throw out the failed, flawed NAFTA agreement and Bernie hanging NAFTA on Joe Biden. Everyone (starting with businessmen Ross Perot) who was not a globalist, knew in 1994 that NAFTA would cost the USA millions of logging, mining and manufacturing jobs, which it did. President Trump knew this was a terrible deal and changed it with huge bipartisan support, Although no support from MSM. Bernie hit Biden on NAFTA again last night and will continue to hit on how ill advised NAFTA was. Second, President Trump taking on Biden led 1994 crime bill has the Left changing sides on this issue hourly…. Again, can’t make it up.

        • Submitted by BK Anderson on 03/04/2020 - 09:41 am.

          “can’t make it up…”

          No, but apparently one can make up nonsense that some relatively minor changes (mostly effected by the Dem House) amount to “throwing out NAFTA”.

          The reality is that the guts of NAFTA remain very much in effect, despite whatever Trumpian propaganda you may consume.

        • Submitted by RB Holbrook on 03/04/2020 - 09:47 am.

          Trump did not “throw out” NAFTA. As anyone who gets their information from sources other than pro-Trump agitprop outlets will tell you, the new agreement is a modification and supplement to NAFTA. No matter what the Goniff-in-Chief wants to tell you. NAFTA is still, essentially, still ion force.

          • Submitted by joe smith on 03/04/2020 - 09:07 pm.

            Look up country of origin clause in new USMCA and tell me it is not better than NAFTA for USA workers. Canada and Mexico used to move products not made in North America to the USA using NAFTA rules. Not happening with new agreement. That is why all but 10 Senators voted for it.

            • Submitted by RB Holbrook on 03/05/2020 - 09:13 am.

              Again, this is just an adjustment of the existing NAFTA. The overall framework remains in effect.

              • Submitted by joe smith on 03/06/2020 - 06:49 am.

                A quick country of origin lesson. Canadian company A can buy Chinese steel at 1 dollar a ton, brand it Canadian steel and sell it to USA for 2 dollars a ton under old NAFTA rules. Under new USMCA rules that same steel will have a tariff placed on it because country of origin in not N America. USMCA stops steel dumping on our economy. America First, working for Americans.

                • Submitted by RB Holbrook on 03/06/2020 - 10:01 am.

                  “USMCA stops steel dumping on our economy.”

                  Well, no. It stops one particular type of dumping. The US still does not have the capacity to meet the domestic demand for steel.

                  “America First, working for Americans.”

                  Let us never forget the origin of that phrase. Do you suppose Fred Trump learned it during his Klan-curious days, and passed it on to his son?

    • Submitted by RB Holbrook on 03/04/2020 - 09:51 am.

      “Both Biden and Bernie have become millionaires . . .”

      The bulk of Senator Sanders’s wealth comes from writing books that became bestsellers.

      I understand that he wrote those books himself. What a crazy thing to do, right?

      • Submitted by Pat Terry on 03/04/2020 - 11:16 am.

        Some of the money came from his wife’s salary and buyout from the college she ran into the ground. The FBI investigated her for bank fraud for the loans the college default on.

        • Submitted by RB Holbrook on 03/05/2020 - 09:17 am.

          Yes, the FBI investigated and found no reason to prosecute.

          The bulk of Senator Sanders’s net worth comes from his book deals. Apparently, he wrote those books himself and did not plagiarize them, if we’re bent on dredging up scandals.

    • Submitted by sue martinson on 03/04/2020 - 11:01 am.

      Well, Bernie is a democratic socialist. That he does not deny. But most forget to put the democratic in front of socialist so he suddenly becomes a villain, one THOSE. It’s a form of propaganda. Socialists have a lot of good ideas, like minimum wage, the 8-hour day, social security–a long list.
      But as Chis Hedges points out in his latest column on Truthdig, Bernie is really a moderate. Not a radical. The conservative neoliberal media (who don’t care who wins as long as they get their money and their corrupt system stays intact), they control the mainstream corporate media and more and they have won with Biden as their candidate. It is very sad for the American people. There is no choice between Biden and Trump. They represent the same interests in the end. I am mostly just embarrassed for Minnesota falling for the corporate media line. Like a lot of the country. Unfortunately, Amy Klobuchar is in that same camp. At least District 5 went for Bernie. For the commentor who wondered if Bernie supporters could vote for Biden (once again we probably will have to choose between who may be the lesser of two evils.) I have not decided yet. I may not be able to bring myself to vote for Biden, although of course I do not want Trump to win.

      • Submitted by Pat Terry on 03/04/2020 - 11:19 am.

        The idea that there is no difference between Biden and Trump is something only someone with an overinflated sense of privilege and entitlement would say. If you are LGBT, have a pre-existing medical condition, or an immigrant child locked in a cage on the border, those differences very much matter.

        • Submitted by Matt Haas on 03/04/2020 - 02:38 pm.

          The first and last groups are infinitesimal minorities, whose causes are not exactly championed by centrists as anything other than a pander for votes. As for the second, I HAVE a son with a preexisting condition, and I HAVE employer sponsored health care insurance, the problem? I can’t still cannot afford care, despite the premiums continuing to climb each and every year. What does the centrist plan offer ME? One of two phenomena are at play here, either centrists are SO insulated from the reality of their fellow citizens that they just haven’t realized that the status quo they are craving is the hell that many are trying to escape, OR they simply don’t care. Neither bodes well for attempting to persuade those folks to rally to the cause.

      • Submitted by Steve Roth on 03/04/2020 - 12:21 pm.

        “There is no choice between Biden and Trump.”

        I’m not even sure where to begin with this.

  4. Submitted by Alan Muller on 03/04/2020 - 08:15 am.

    A discouraging morning for people with progressive views, and for the image and political reputation of Minnesota.

    • Submitted by Edward Blaise on 03/04/2020 - 08:54 am.

      An encouraging morning for people who see replacing an angry, screaming right winger with only minority support for the majority of his views even within in his own party with an angry, screaming left winger with only minority support for the majority of his views even within in his own party as troublesome…

      • Submitted by Matt Haas on 03/04/2020 - 09:09 am.

        Without that “minority support” (that apparently centrist Democrats are comfortable doing without for the foreseeable future) there will be nothing but failure. As it appears you haven’t any interest in attempting to bridge the divide, I see no reason why the left should be doing so unilaterally. You think you are the rock, but since you’ve not clearly established why the “hard place” is gonna be any different than the status quo you offer, your leverage is shot.

    • Submitted by Moira Heffron on 03/04/2020 - 09:04 am.

      With respect, the story is a bit more nuanced. And please don’t discount the more than 100,000 votes cast for Warren.

    • Submitted by Bob Barnes on 03/04/2020 - 10:34 am.

      The problem with Progressivism is that it’s totalitarian in nature. True progress comes from individual freedom and free market capitalism. Progressives always try to control people, reduce freedoms and control the markets.

      So I would say most people reject the Progressive ideology of the Bernie Sanders of the world

      • Submitted by Edward Blaise on 03/04/2020 - 11:29 am.

        Yeah, no totalitarianism from Putin, Un, Ergodan, Duerte, ElSisi.

        Why is your exemplar of personal freedom only pals with the worst instances of totalitarian rule?

        Trump and his pals love totalitarianism without the messy socialist sharing of resources.

        Putin is allegedly the richest man in the world and has only worked in the government for his entire life and you are outraged that Bernie made a few bucks writing books?

        Can we just try for a little consistency here?

      • Submitted by Charles Holtman on 03/04/2020 - 12:40 pm.

        Simply placing words together doesn’t produce meaning. Outside of heuristics, in the world itself, there is no such thing as free-market capitalism. Progressivism strategically constrains accumulated advantages of power to maximize freedom. Without such constraints, capitalism necessarily ends in totalitarianism. Indeed, there is no route to totalitarianism that doesn’t pass through capitalism.

  5. Submitted by Robert Carrillo on 03/04/2020 - 08:26 am.

    Here we go again. The dance of the DFL lemmings..

  6. Submitted by Pat Berg since 2011 on 03/04/2020 - 08:27 am.

    I just hope – if Biden ends up the Democratic nominee – that he stops rocking back defensively on his heels every time he’s attacked the way he was doing in the debates. With Trump, that will be fatal.

    He needs to learn to re-cultivate the “devil may care” persona he had while VP (and everything was going his way) and just laugh off the childish Trump insults as the ridiculous absurdities that they are. Let them roll off like water off a duck’s back. Keep the interchanges focused on policy and position and don’t let things stray from the serious business of highlighting who’s actually most qualified to sit in the Oval Office.

    He can’t let Trump suck him in and control the game (something so many others have fallen prey to – I STILL don’t understand why). Hopefully he (or whoever wins the nomination) is up to it.

    • Submitted by BK Anderson on 03/04/2020 - 09:56 am.

      Excellent points; unfortunately, Biden’s a terrible debater, and at his age he ain’t gonna be learning any new tricks. He’ll take the bait every time, and get angry while doing it. It won’t be pretty.

      But he’s going to have plenty of opportunity to display his one-on-one forensic talents long before meeting the Grand Imbecile, however, because it’s pretty clear that Bernie is going to tear into him hammer and tongs. So it’ll be the Battle of the Ancients and it’s not going to make Biden look too good.

      It sure does look like the Dem electorate has spoken, however. One can only imagine what the race would have looked like if the two Octogenarian Hopefuls had seen fit to pass the baton to some younger champions, and cheered them on instead of (again) running.

      • Submitted by Rachel Kahler on 03/06/2020 - 11:47 am.

        Elections are decided by those who show up. Unfortunately for the Millennials and GenZers, you (generic “you,” not you you) can’t vote on Snapchat or Reddit. No amount of angst online will make your vote count if you don’t show up at the polls. If you want to decide who you can vote for, you have to show up to the primary. Otherwise, you’re just screaming into the void. Why should anybody care what the younger voters want if the younger voters don’t care enough to, you know, vote?

        Don’t get me wrong, I hate the fact that it’s the old white people who apparently decide everything (and I’m not, YET, one of them), but at least I show up to try to make a difference.

        With all that said, I did vote for Bernie last time during the caucuses and I was more than a little PO’d that he ran again. There were so many other good options who better represented the face of America. But no. We are down to a couple of old white guys again, who will face off against another old white guy. That’s clearly not entirely defining of the situation (I mean…we’re on the verge of a total collapse of our Constitutional Democratic Republic because of one of those old white guys who is supported by a whole bunch of other old white guys), but jeezuz, we could do better.

        • Submitted by Matt Haas on 03/06/2020 - 09:04 pm.

          But CAN we do better, if 1. Non-millenial gen Z’er, (can’t we just admit we’re old, part of the problem is our refusal to let go of OUR youth here) cannot find it within their ability to STOP denigrating the youth at every possible opportunity. Good grief, how much did YOU enjoy being called a slacker? Why would they support anyone who offers THAT as the reward 2. The same folks doing the above continue to complain about electing old white men while not voting for anything but old white men, because “electability”.

          • Submitted by Rachel Kahler on 03/09/2020 - 02:43 pm.

            I’ve been voting since I was 18, even when they called me a slacker (among other things). When people have negative opinions of you, you can either meet or exceed their expectations (in either direction). Ultimately, though, you’re the owner of your own destiny. This X’er “slacker didn’t ask to be born,” either, but here I am and I’m taking every opportunity to be better than what was expected of me.

            For what it’s worth, Boomers were called slackers when they were young, too. And yet, in 1968, the voting rate of all 18-24 year olds was about 50%, while in 2016, it was 40%. In 1996, the first election I was old enough to vote in, it was just over 30%–pathetic. But, to be fair, Xers hadn’t tasted the effects of political choices at that time–we were in the middle of an unprecedented economic growth period. Foolish us. But, I guess the economic crisis of 2008/2009 wasn’t enough to motivate the next generation.

            • Submitted by Matt Haas on 03/09/2020 - 09:40 pm.

              Yeah, that growth that made THOSE centrists (curiously, mostly the same ones) promise we, the not quite either/ors, (“Class of 97” here) the world, while completely screwing the pooch in terms of making good on those promises. You want “experiential learning”? I graduated college Dec 2001, bought a house April 2007, had my first kid Dec 2010. All I’ve seen is centrists, squandering opportunities at the most key moments of my life. When I finally started to get my footing, their failure inflicted Trump on us all, and now they seem poised to try and seal the deal. Your mistake is in thinking we all learn the same political lessons, AND in thinking it’s only the young who need to pay attention to what they’ve learned.

              • Submitted by Rachel Kahler on 03/13/2020 - 09:26 am.

                Class of ’95 here. They still taught me that if I wanted a voice, I needed to show up. I have been outraged since well before I could vote. I have had to temper the rage for my own damned health in the last few years. But still, I vote. Democracies work on a “show up or shut up” basis, so it does not matter how disenchanted the kids are. No amount of emo is gonna change their situation. Or are you saying that it’s right for Millennials (and Zers) to prove the the naysayers right when they call them “slackers?” Even Bernie isn’t important enough for the youth to show up now, since he’s losing the primaries…and it’s not because of shenanigans or a lack of media coverage this time. All the name calling in the world doesn’t justify not showing up. You can’t resent it if you represent it.

      • Submitted by ian wade on 03/07/2020 - 12:26 am.

        I don’t know about that. Biden slapped Paul Ryan around pretty convincingly in 2012. In fact, his performance that night helped reignite Obama’s reelection campaign which was struggling at that point.

  7. Submitted by Robert Gauthier on 03/04/2020 - 08:53 am.

    I think each side is trying to jump to conclusions with looking at data. The press has done democracy a disservice with their horse race obsession for elections and that leads to speculative conclusions.

    Let’s look at last night. We have a party standard bearer with a long party and country history, which also can be a hindrance because it leaves a long history to use and misrepresent against the candidate. He also was likely the victim of a smear from GOP and Russia because they realize they will not have easy skating- so they Hillary him with smears and bots.

    We also have a long standing independent who has proudly championed some social problem solutions without any bipartisan interest. He captures the energy of the disaffected and angry, who want change. He also is a strident ideologue who lectures more than listen. And he is being helped by Russians, because they see him as less electable. Take away the social solutions and you have a Trump clone- outsider, ideologue and appeals to angry disaffected voters.

    So we have three leading candidates- two being helped by Russians and/or GOP, vs. a long standing party stalwart who has been smeared and slandered personally and his family. This was the 2016 playbook to a T, and no one talks about the history and issues, just the horse race. And now the GOP senate is opening investigations into Ukraine to further smear him for the general election.

    Despite all of this Biden won the overall vote totals, won more states and his supporters turned out. Sanders young voters did not vote, and that is the only real true indicator of strength. Let’s stick to facts and talk issues. And the press should report on Russian interference, the real facts behind each candidate and most importantly, what really is at risk if Trump wins.

    • Submitted by Matt Haas on 03/04/2020 - 09:15 am.

      I can’t imagine why young folks feel disillusioned with the political process, when they vote they’re labelled uninformed and naive, when they don’t they’re lazy and unreliable. Its rather humourous to hear moderates, happy to proclaim the “future demographic advantage” of the Democratic Party whilst simultaneously doing whatever they can to drive the actual people that represent that change away from the party as quickly as they can, since the ideas they hold threaten their status and power.

      • Submitted by William Hunter Duncan on 03/04/2020 - 10:48 am.

        The hapless Democratic Party can’t and won’t see how their shaming of and condescension toward the working poor of America lead to Trump’s win in 2016, and looks to lead in that direction again. Believing the unaccountable machinations of the CIA et al Intelligence Community while casting aspersions on anyone who supports Bernie or Trump as a Russian stooge, while ignoring or mocking progressive pleas for meaningful change, while supporting systemic economic and political corruption…

        Sounds like a story of the collapse of empire/civilization in real time…

        • Submitted by Robert Gauthier on 03/04/2020 - 12:19 pm.

          Don’t see how looking at facts is shaming. If the press wasn’t so lazy or owned by the wealthy, they would say the truth, the wasting of the middle class was done by GOP issues and policies. Instead they perpetuate the myth of Reagan as a great president while he authored many of these policies. AND the young did not show up to vote last night.

          • Submitted by Matt Haas on 03/04/2020 - 02:47 pm.

            The problem comes when you say that as a forgone conclusion, that somehow the youth owe it to you to turn out, as they have some sort of obligation to do as their told, despite understanding implicitly that they will receive nothing of what they desire. WHY would they? The past week has been spent by centrists of all stripes deriding their desires as foolishness, in the media and elsewhere, likening their desire for systemic change, that might actually give them a shot at NOT being the first generation to have less success than their parents, and they’re infantilized as toddlers demanding “free stuff” from all quarters. Would YOU turn out to vote, when it’s been made perfectly clear that the powers that be in the only party that would even consider offering you aid has made it perfectly clear they will not allow the ideas you champion to gain any foothold in their agenda?

            • Submitted by Pat Terry on 03/04/2020 - 10:19 pm.

              What you are describing is a chicken and egg scenario. The youth don’t vote so they get screwed over. The know they will get screwed over so they don’t vote. Somehow you’ve got to break that.

              • Submitted by Matt Haas on 03/05/2020 - 08:54 am.

                No, they aren’t screwed over because they don’t vote, they are screwed over because even when they do, their policy desires still receive no attention. Young people voted in record numbers for Pres Obama, I was one of them at the time, but then received nothing of any consequence for that effort. You can call the ACA what you like, its allowed me to insure my son,(be nice if I could actually afford to use it), but for anyone that DOESN’T have a preexisting condition (or happens to be in the individual market) all it amounts to is a fractional reduction in the premiums that continue to go up year over year on their employer group plan. Lost 120k in value on my home between 2007 and 2008, but nothing was done to aid me, banks seemed to have the adminstrations ear, they were made whole almost immediately, I guess bad behavior was forgivable, bad luck not so much. Bokmer Centrists STILL can’t grasp the concept that THEIR youth has absolutely no resemblance to what the youth of today face, that the pittance they paid for higher education wouldn’t cover books today, that life progression has been pushed back years, on account of the apparent desire to sock youth with so much debt they very nearly drown. I understand the appeal of giving the proverbial middle finger to all of you, though I never did while I was young, nor will I now. I’ll ask such folks to reconsider, but I won’t criticize their decision.

                • Submitted by kurt nelson on 03/05/2020 - 03:17 pm.

                  Here I thought Repubs promoted self sufficiency, you know, pull yourself up by the bootstraps and all that. But you seem to have your hand out for whatever the gubmint might give you – seems sort of lame to me, but…

                  Did you sell your house in 2007 or 08. If not, then you didn’t lose anything, so lets let that lie go away don’t ya think. It’s like the stock market, people complain that the market is down, and they are losing money, but you only lose (or gain) when you actually sell – not in make believe land where it appears you want the gubmint to help you with fantasy losses.

                  If you can’t afford health care, go get a better paying job – it’s a pretty simple out.

          • Submitted by William Hunter Duncan on 03/05/2020 - 09:11 am.

            Republicans love to keep the poor, poor, and make them generally more poor and less empowered. Indeed.

            While it was Clinton who deregulated the banks, leading to the greatest transfer of wealth in the history of the world, from the middle class and poor, called the housing bubble and Great Recession. Clinton and Biden’s crime bill triangulated from republicans gave us mass incarceration and poverty entrenched. NAFTA gutted the working class. That was Clinton. Obama protected the bankers while 9 million foreclosures happened. His Federal Reserve gave the wealthy $4.5 trillion of free, made up money to play with, while poverty, drug addiction, homelessness and suicide ravaged America.

            Democrats are the architects of the pathologies of this economy as much as Republicans. Denial of that is a foundation of this Biden run. Homage to the holy market, to save entrenched investments. More of the same.

      • Submitted by Rachel Kahler on 03/06/2020 - 11:53 am.

        I can’t imagine why they don’t show up. The last of the Millennials turned 18 in 2012 (or 2014, depending on the source). And that’s the first and last time they showed up, despite having pretty much the exact same level of populational clout as the Boomers. Instead, we have #OKBoomer instead of voting. Not that I mind the hashtag. It’s pretty funny, actually (only most of the time because #NotAllBoomers).

    • Submitted by Tom Crain on 03/08/2020 - 10:25 am.

      “Let’s stick to facts and talk issues.” Your comment is woefully short on both.

      The extent of Russian interference in 2016 and now in 2020 is clearly exaggerated. We know from 2016 they used social media to sow chaos, but the effectiveness of this is unproven. Facebook recently said it had seen no evidence of Russian support for Sanders on its platform. Bloomberg proved that half a billion $ in social media ads only buys so much support.

      On the top issues:

      Healthcare:
      Biden wants to build on Obamacare and prop up the private insurers with even more subsidies to reduce the # of uninsured. He has no viable plan to bring down costs.
      Sanders wants to rebuild it with M4A, a system that works and is popular. Exit polling showed majority approval in ALL Super Tues states for M4A.

      Immigration: not much difference

      Climate Change: both have a goal of 100% clean energy economy and net-zero emissions no later than 2050. Biden thinks we can spend $10B a year to get there, Sanders proposes a comprehensive approach via Green New Deal.

      Economy:
      Biden would invest $1.3 trillion over 10 years in infrastructure paid for by reversing Trumps tax cut. He has “evolved” on Cap Gains taxes which he wants to raise now and has evolved on the idea of deficit spending which he railed against his entire Senate career even supporting a balanced budget amendment. Biden voted to reduce CapGains tax in half in 1997 and in 2010 Biden championed and Obama signed an extension of the Bush tax cuts.
      Sanders would cap consumer interest rates at 15%; impose an “extreme wealth” tax on the top 0.1 percent of U.S. households; break up big banks and reimpose Glass-Steagall Act separating commercial and investment banking; and break up corporate monopolies; reverse Trump tax cuts.

  8. Submitted by William Hunter Duncan on 03/04/2020 - 08:55 am.

    Biden will be demolished by Trump in the debates.

    Now the Democratic Party will turn it’s back and act like the progressive vote/working class does not exist, courting “moderate” Republicans for a return to the Obama years. No real Hope and No real Change, just a return to a status quo of neoliberal austerity for the many and every advantage for the few.

    Except no amount of moderate Republicans could possibly make up for the loss of Bernie’s fans, who will not likely show up for Biden because they know Biden offers them nothing but contempt and trickle down condescension.

    • Submitted by lisa miller on 03/04/2020 - 09:26 am.

      Yeah well they didn’t show up in 2016, so how committed are they? Just keep counting how many Trump judges we have to live with while you pout. The flip side is a lot of people are not voting for a guy praising Castro on 60 minutes and up until 8 years ago wasn’t even a democrat.

      • Submitted by William Hunter Duncan on 03/04/2020 - 10:15 am.

        Again, maybe if the Dem party offered the working poor something other than indifference, condescension and a system rigged to keep them working poor, then maybe Dems could build a real coalition to beat Trump.

        • Submitted by Bob Barnes on 03/04/2020 - 12:28 pm.

          Democrats have never supported free market capitalism or individual freedoms. That’s why we have so many working poor. Democrat policies make people poor and keep them poor. Repubs aren’t much better but they are the lesser of evils in that regard.

          • Submitted by William Hunter Duncan on 03/05/2020 - 09:24 am.

            Elite in both parties love the free market, as long as that is about empowering corporations, banks and billionaires at the expense of working people.

            I regularly call out Dems here for their hypocrisy, acting like all the economic ills of America are republican’s doing. I will do the same here – acting like Republicans are the champions of the working poor is like saying pollution is good for you, or the sky is green, or shoes are for wearing on your face. Thinking such is detrimental to your health.

    • Submitted by Pat Berg since 2011 on 03/04/2020 - 10:03 am.

      “Bernie’s fans, who will not likely show up for Biden”

      So they’d rather have four more years of IMPOTUS? Seriously?

      • Submitted by William Hunter Duncan on 03/04/2020 - 10:39 am.

        …”because they know Biden offers them nothing but contempt and trickle down condescension.”

        You forgot that bit, the last half of the sentence you quoted. But then, maybe that proves my point?

        Working poor are supposed to vote Dem because why? Because Dems are going to make their lives better? How?

      • Submitted by Matt Haas on 03/04/2020 - 10:53 am.

        They’ve had 40 years of indifference from moderates. At some point, one understands that one is not actual an ally with those who will never allow the ideas one holds to come to fruition. While it’s true that life under a second Trump regime will be awful, its incumbent upon whomever wishes to offer an alternative to explain exactly WHY life under their rule would be demonstrably better. The problem for Biden, is that the lives of many of those who support Sanders will NOT be drastically improved under his policies, after all, support for Sanders the first time was couched on the experiences of these people under the Obama administration, and unless Biden is able to produce concrete detriments to continued Trump rule, beyond existential calls to “preserve democracy”, which sound alluring to political junkies like us, but fall flat as so much “political mumbo jumbo” to your average voter, he expect he’ll find the going pretty tough.

        • Submitted by William Hunter Duncan on 03/04/2020 - 01:23 pm.

          Matt,

          I fully expect should Biden or Trump win, conditions for the working poor left and right will be demonstrably worse, after the banks etc elite are made whole after the economic hit of Covid 19, increasing climate change damage, and assorted debt reckoning from fracking to derivatives. 2024 and 2028 are beyond reckoning….

        • Submitted by Pat Berg since 2011 on 03/04/2020 - 01:47 pm.

          I have just three words: Supreme Court picks.

          • Submitted by Matt Haas on 03/04/2020 - 02:53 pm.

            Unless you expect Clarence Thomas to die, it doesn’t really matter. That fight is lost, for at least the next decade if, not more. Not to mention the fact I have no confidence that a President Biden would appoint a liberal judge should such a situation arise, claims of “cannot upset the balance” and “working across the aisle” sure to be uttered.

            • Submitted by Pat Terry on 03/04/2020 - 10:22 pm.

              You don’t know who is going to die or retire. If Clinton had won, gerrymandering would be gone now. Now its perfectly legal. Her defeat ensures that Medicare for all would never be found constitutional with this court. We’ll be lucky to keep the ACA.

              • Submitted by Matt Haas on 03/05/2020 - 09:00 am.

                That is no less conjecture than any other opinion. Who would her choice have been? How exactly do you suppose she would have gotten said selection confirmed? The mistake was made with the (centrist) refusal to go to war over the Senates obstruction in the final days of Obama’s term. They needed to shut the country down, until Merrick Garland, milquetoast as he was, was seated. They should have forced Kennedy (and RBG, sadly) out years ago to make sure this didn’t happen. But they didn’t, and now its done.

            • Submitted by RB Holbrook on 03/05/2020 - 09:18 am.

              How is Justice Ginsburg doing?

              • Submitted by Matt Haas on 03/05/2020 - 12:39 pm.

                Sadly, it doesn’t matter, the best liberals can hope for, for at least a generation, is a 5-4 split, unless Thomas is gone. I don’t expect he will be, in the next 4 years, so all the damage will be done regardless who replaces her.

                • Submitted by RB Holbrook on 03/05/2020 - 01:31 pm.

                  True, but remember that there are always going to be District Court and Circuit Court of Appeals vacancies to fill.

                  • Submitted by Matt Haas on 03/05/2020 - 03:25 pm.

                    Will there? From what I recall, the one thing the Republican Senate has been exceptionally prompt with has been filling federal court vacancies with the most venal, partisan hacks available. The younger, the better. Look, I get it, its disheartening to admit we simply got outdone here, but it’s part and parcel with why I just cannot stomach the centrist arrogance, even more now than in 2016. THEY own this, while they blather on about pragmatism and sensibility the wreckage of their actions speaks to their true objective, seeking the comfort of the familiar, the cocoon of fanciful nostalgia over a past that never was. The barest modicum of fight, the merest notion of long play strategy when in power, would have prevented the judicial disaster we now face, but they will never, NEVER take the blame, and also will they NEVER change their course.

        • Submitted by Rachel Kahler on 03/06/2020 - 11:56 am.

          No they haven’t. Most of them are well under 40. They know no more than what they’ve experienced, just like the rest of us. And even if they did, they have a taste of worse. Unless they prefer active abuse over neglect (or possibility of care). I know, there are psychological tests on rats that might explain all of this, but I would hope that the conceit of humans being something more than “just animals” might be more than just a conceit.

    • Submitted by BK Anderson on 03/04/2020 - 10:15 am.

      What if Biden were to pick Warren as VP?

      • Submitted by Matt Haas on 03/04/2020 - 11:19 am.

        Had this been a year ago, before the inevitable poisoning of the waters that campaigning lends itself too, sure? But what does she offer now? The centrists have already dismissed her ideas as fantasy, she couldn’t carry her own state, her leaving the Senate opens up a seat held by Republicans in the recent past, and it looks like obvious pandering instead of a good faith gesture. I just don’t see who it helps?

      • Submitted by William Hunter Duncan on 03/04/2020 - 01:13 pm.

        Highly unlikely. Though if she accepts it, you can be certain she will not be so vocal about banks and billionaires.

      • Submitted by RB Holbrook on 03/06/2020 - 09:57 am.

        I doubt that will happen. From what I hear, the two are not that close personally.

        Remember that Biden was the driving force behind the so-called bankruptcy “reform” act. Senator Warren made her academic reputation as an expert on bankruptcy law, and became a Democrat after she became disillusioned with 90s-era neoliberalism.

    • Submitted by Pat Terry on 03/04/2020 - 10:46 am.

      Bernie’s fans didn’t even show up for Bernie yesterday. Or maybe they did, and there just aren’t that many of them.

      • Submitted by Matt Haas on 03/04/2020 - 11:23 am.

        Really doesn’t matter, centrists do not have the numbers to win without them in the fall, and show no signs of attempting to win their support apart from “hostage taking”. All is lost, and you know it, hence the “victory lap”, it’s your last moment of glory before it all falls apart.

      • Submitted by Bob Barnes on 03/04/2020 - 12:30 pm.

        I’d say it’s the latter. Seems more like a small group that’s loud about their support. The more moderate Dems won’t vote for him.

      • Submitted by William Hunter Duncan on 03/04/2020 - 01:15 pm.

        More than enough to swing the next election. A lot more than the “moderate” Republicans you seek to make common cause with.

    • Submitted by Edward Blaise on 03/04/2020 - 11:44 am.

      And, if you recall, HRC demolished Trump in the debates.

      How did that work out?

      Trump will be done in by the simple fact people prefer not to vote for jerks.

      The working folks in PA, MI, WI will turn out for Biden and he will win.

      • Submitted by William Hunter Duncan on 03/05/2020 - 09:33 am.

        Maybe. And then Biden can resurrect TPP/TTIP/TISA trade agreements and they will have even less power, autonomy or money?

  9. Submitted by Karen Sandness on 03/04/2020 - 09:46 am.

    Biden got 38.6% of the primary vote. Sanders and Warren split the left-of-center vote, but together totaled a bit over 45%.

    In the various circles I move in, I have encountered passionate supporters of Bernie, Liz, Amy, and Pete, the kind of people who wear campaign gear, contribute more money than they can afford, put up lawn signs, and spend their weekends phone banking and door knocking

    I have never met anyone who is a passionate supporter of Joe. The attitudes range from, “Well, if he’s the nominee, I’ll have to vote for him” to “If the Democrats are dumb enough to nominate Biden, I’m staying home.”

    My take is that both Pete’s and Amy’s people were blindsided by the decisions to drop out immediately before Super Tuesday. Amy supported Joe wholeheartedly, even appearing with him in Texas.

    Pete was not so enthusiastic, and the supporters of his that I know often agree with Bernie on the issues but do not like Bernie’s style. I suspect that some of them went to Warren.

    I know at least one person who found it all too confusing and didn’t vote at all.

    • Submitted by Pat Terry on 03/04/2020 - 11:23 am.

      Don’t assume that those Warren voters were going to Sanders. The Warren supporters I know resent the non-stop barrage of misogyinstic harassment from Sanders supporters, not to mention Sanders calling her a liar.

      • Submitted by Karen Sandness on 03/06/2020 - 09:27 pm.

        What I meant was that the ISSUES that Sanders and Warren espoused were similar. If only one of them had been in the race at the beginning, that person might have triumphed.

        As for the “Bernie bro” meme, Peter Daou, who worked on Hillary Clinton’s campaign in 2016, has admitted that he made that up. If you look at pictures of the crowd at Sanders’ rallies, they’re young, old, male, and female. A lot of are old enough to remember when health care was affordable, state colleges were affordable, housing was affordable, and the minimum wage was adjusted so that it was actually enough to live on.

        The Sanders group that I participated in on Facebook was constantly plagued by people acting like “Bernie bros.” They were banned. The administrators had no idea who they were, and some of the worst ones had the typical troll profile of a picture that looked as if it was taken out of a magazine along with generic photos of flowers, animals, and babies.

        At the same time, we got plenty of grief from supporters of other candidates. It’s not as if other candidates were perfectly soft-spoken ladies and gentlemen. All the candidates have trollish supporters, but only Sanders’ supporters were branded “rude.”

        That was on top of the daily concern trolling on the part of the columnists on New York Times and Washington Times editorial pages.

        I think that there are a lot of people of unknown origin working to undermine all the candidates. On the internet, it’s hard to tell exactly who they are or why they do what they do.

    • Submitted by RB Holbrook on 03/04/2020 - 11:46 am.

      “Pete was not so enthusiastic, and the supporters of his that I know often agree with Bernie on the issues but do not like Bernie’s style.”

      Based on my own observations, I know that a lot of voters were taken with the idea of an openly gay President. The fact that the LGBTQ community is not some progressive monolith didn’t occur to them.

      I also know many people who liked the idea of having a well-educated, literate President again. Unfortunately for Mayor Buttigieg and his campaign, his policies and his record (especially on racial issues) cancelled out his personality.

    • Submitted by Bob Barnes on 03/04/2020 - 12:32 pm.

      I’ve yet to meet anyone that will vote for Bernie. So anecdotal evidence isn’t very reliable. But judging by people who have changed parties, it seems a lot of Dems are sick of the leftward lurch the party has taken with Bernie, AOC et al.

      • Submitted by Edward Blaise on 03/04/2020 - 03:44 pm.

        You need to get out more.

        222,530 Said they would vote for Bernie yesterday.

        Essentially the entire population of St Louis County MN.

      • Submitted by Dennis Wagner on 03/05/2020 - 05:03 pm.

        Living here in the city, I have yet to meet anyone who supports the totalitarian/authoritarian crazy right wing, everyone should be packing to kill agenda, much less Trump!

    • Submitted by Tom Crain on 03/08/2020 - 10:38 am.

      A significant amount of Warren voters support her more based on identity politics than on the issues she campaigns on. These are the portion of Hillary supporters, maybe even PUMAs from the 2008 primary, that care more about being on a team than about the issues.

      If your preferences were Warren,Sanders or Sanders,Warren then you were a progressive concerned about issues first, candidate next. If you were a Sanders or Warren first and another candidate as a second choice, you were a fan of a political personality and the issues are less important.

  10. Submitted by Dennis Litfin on 03/04/2020 - 11:29 am.

    Biden needs to pick a progressive as running mate and his best choice would be Stacey Abrams of Georgia.

    • Submitted by Pat Terry on 03/04/2020 - 02:56 pm.

      I think that would be a great pick.

      • Submitted by Edward Blaise on 03/04/2020 - 07:52 pm.

        A pretty big leap from a member of the GA state legislature to a breath away from being the leader of the free world. Well, at least what used to be the leader of the free world.

        I wish she would run for one of the GA Senate seats just as I wish Pete would run for Governor of IN. If he can get elected as a gay Gov. of IN he can get elected President.

      • Submitted by Matt Haas on 03/04/2020 - 11:56 pm.

        Why exactly? She’s a fine person, but won’t carry her home state, doesn’t bring in a constituency that Biden isn’t strong with, and her signature policy position, voter suppression, only resonates with political die-hards and the POC communities it affects (sad, but true) which will be voting for him anyway. Honestly, I don’t know of a pick that’s going to bring the kind of support he would need from the left so his only option would be to go with the OTHER major constituency he underperforms in. Were I him, the pick would be Julian Castro, but like I said, it’s gonna be some old guard retread sure not to harbor any impulse to rock the boat, and sure to be firmly in party control should the worst come to pass with the elderly headliner.

      • Submitted by Matt Haas on 03/05/2020 - 09:39 am.

        I’m also somewhat curious at the apparent philosophical dichotomy present in this opinion. You seem to simultaneously suggest that 1. We are a ” very conservative nation” (not sure if that was a post here or the other thread” and as such the electorate could never support such madness as subsidized higher education, increased minimum wage, and single payer health care, but yet, with this remark you seem to imply you think that same “very conservative” electorate, one in which vile, racist memes about women of color, up to and including the former first lady of this nation, are circulated publically, shamelessly, and frequently, where misogyny is a party platform for many “disillusioned Trump supporting Republicans” whose votes you are relying on to carry the day, will jump right aboard and happily vote to elect not only a woman, but an African American woman at that, to the 2nd highest office in the land? Where’s the incrementalism there?

    • Submitted by ian wade on 03/07/2020 - 12:34 am.

      I’m baffled by the deification of this woman. Exactly what has she accomplished that would elevate her to being one heartbeat away from the presidency?

      • Submitted by Matt Haas on 03/08/2020 - 12:26 am.

        Yeah, it really doesn’t fit the pattern of what they say they want. Sadly, I’m starting to think its gonna be Deval Patrick, which if one thinks about it, is a deeply cynical and disastrous choice, but one I can honestly see the ideological minds behind this candidacy making.

      • Submitted by Tom Crain on 03/08/2020 - 10:51 am.

        With a younger candidate than Biden she might be ok. She checks the boxes as a black woman who showed she might be popular enough to win statewide in GA, a red state.

        I think it would be a mistake for Biden not to pick a candidate with more experience. Let’s be real, he’s not likely to be running again in 2024 and this will be a concern. Also, its not like he can’t count on the black vote.

        • Submitted by Matt Haas on 03/08/2020 - 07:14 pm.

          If he picks someone “more experienced” he loses the left, period. It would need to be someone who brings a constituency with them, to try and mitigate some of that loss. There isn’t such a candidate from any group apart from African Americans, and I’m convinced they won’t pick a woman, just call it a hunch. The field is really quite narrow when you look at the parameters they are presumably operating within. He’s gonna have to pull remarkable numbers from African Americans, both in percentage and in turnout, to even have a prayer. But, that’s the course they apparently choose, as playing nice with the left is apparently less preferable than 4 more years of Trump.

  11. Submitted by Edward Blaise on 03/04/2020 - 12:44 pm.

    Bernie supporters are truly typified by his Millennial followers:

    “I may turn out and vote, and if I do, my candidate had better win or I’m taking my toys and going home to stay”

    I certainly do not blame them, I blame their indulgent parents who never had the courage to say no.

    • Submitted by Matt Haas on 03/05/2020 - 12:00 am.

      And they’ll continue to hold folks, who regard such condescending pap as some sort of wisdom, as those who can not be supported. Never do you Boomers get more patronizing than when you notice the young folks refuse to hold you in the high regard you somehow feel you are entitled to.

    • Submitted by Tom Crain on 03/08/2020 - 10:52 am.

      Instead of casting about to find blame, get out and support your candidate with a positive message!

  12. Submitted by Dennis Wagner on 03/04/2020 - 12:46 pm.

    I get it, more folks voted for someone else so the system is rigged! Kind of like all these sporting events, the other team scored more points, must be a rigged game! You can tell the Trump folks 100%, everything that doesn’t go their way is a conspiracy, and then when you actually have a conspiracy, the Russian interference, its a hoax, and when the guy wins with less votes, that is not a conspiracy or a hoax! Can’t make this stuff up! You know that Dunning-Kruger effect really rings like a church bell out here.

  13. Submitted by Solly Johnson on 03/04/2020 - 01:01 pm.

    Sanders is an FDR style Democrat, and his proposed policies reflect that. Many Democrats often forget that Obama often praised Reagan and never quoted FDR; in fact, in an interview a few years ago Obama stated that he could be correctly labeled as a moderate Republican. It simply shows how far right the Democratic Party has moved in the last half century.

    • Submitted by Edward Blaise on 03/04/2020 - 07:56 pm.

      Social Security, Medicare and the Affordable Care Act are the 3 most significant progressive social programs in the last 100 years.

      Just as Trumpians showed up at rallies with posters saying:

      “Keep yo gummint hands off my Medicare”

      They will some day do the same for the ACA.

      Thank you President Obama.

      • Submitted by RB Holbrook on 03/05/2020 - 04:36 pm.

        I have long thought that the ACA should be renamed “The Donald J. Trump Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act.” Not only would that make it safe from attacks by the White House, but it would be immune from any criticism of any kind by the Republicans.

      • Submitted by Tom Crain on 03/08/2020 - 11:04 am.

        You overstate support for Obamacare. It’s favorable bounces around between 45-55 support, 35-45 against. This is not as clear as the support for Medicare which roughly seven in ten Americans express a favorable view of.

        Support for Medicare for All is a bit trickier and depends upon wording of poll. The latest KFF tracking poll finds that a majority of Americans favor a national Medicare-for-all health plan (56%) but a larger share favors a government-administered “public option” (68%). Notably, nearly half of adults (48%) favor both of these proposals.

  14. Submitted by Paul Udstrand on 03/04/2020 - 01:18 pm.

    Biden won, but he didn’t crush Sanders, he walks away with ten more delegates, and right now he only has 65 more delegates total, hardly an insurmountable lead with 2/3rds of the delegates still up for grabs.

    I suspect Kllobuchar dropped out rather than face a humiliating narrow win or even a loss, and I don’t think surrounding himself with losers gave Biden a boost of any kind. I just think people are afraid to lose to Trump and Sanders didn’t break the “electability” facade that Biden and the media have manufactured.

    I expect Warren will drop out by the end of the week or so, and as Biden and Sanders face off more directly in the next few weeks the messaging and contrasts will become sharper, more focused, and more contrasted.

    • Submitted by Edward Blaise on 03/04/2020 - 03:27 pm.

      Sanders will suffer from MN like moves from a caucus to a primary.

      Bernie won easily here in 2016, more struggles in 2020. Same for OK last night.

      Look out for WA and more of the same…

    • Submitted by ian wade on 03/07/2020 - 12:39 am.

      By any measure, Sanders got his butt kicked. Sanders is currently behind in Michigan and has no chance in Florida. This is over by the end of the month.

  15. Submitted by Jim Spensley on 03/04/2020 - 01:28 pm.

    The Reporter thinks Amy knew from a poll before So. Carolina she was going to win Minnesota?
    After winning Minnesota, her options would been broader even if Biden
    leaped ahead otherwise.

    Perhaps a pollster asked the.right questions of Minnesota.voters: What If Biden surges by winning in SC? What if he doesn’t?

    • Submitted by Paul Udstrand on 03/04/2020 - 04:31 pm.

      I think it’s more likely that Klobuchar saw some polling showing her losing or very narrowly winning MN, which would have been humiliating. I think if she’d thought she would crush Sanders here she would have stayed in one more day just to that.

      On the other hand, you’re right, Since Biden’s “win” has been so narrow, it’s possible that even if Klobuchar got the ten votes Biden won here, and a smattering of other votes nationwide, Biden might be looking at dangerously narrow victory.

Leave a Reply