Did Bernie Win?
Google Trends shows that Bernie was the most searched-for candidate after the debate.
* * *
Some pundit says that Bernie can’t win the election because he calls himself a “democratic socialist” instead of a “capitalist.” But they also said that Obama couldn’t win because he’s black.
* * *
Agreeing with some commenters, I think that Bernie’s big fault is that he’s afraid of confrontation. He was afraid to confront obnoxious protesters at his campaign events, and he’s afraid to go after Hillary Clinton. If he ever became president, Putin would walk all over him.
Lion of the Blogosphere 
Bernie lost.
He might have performed better than Hillary, but the only way it was going to make a difference was if he went after Hillary, and attacked her on the emails, her ethics, her judgement, her…well everything that makes her a bad candidate and would make a worse President. And that’s true for the other Dem candidates as well. The only way forward was to disqualify the frontrunner and none of them did that. Bernie went out of his way to support Hillary on the emails; an issue that in theory lead to an indictment. So this makes me think that none of the candidates, including Sanders, just were not serious candidates. They were only there to provide some window dressing and drama in the debate. If they were serious, they would have taken on a severly weakened and compromised frontrunner and instead they did the opposite.
Mike Street Station
October 15, 2015 at 10:27 AM
Bernie is too much of a schmuck. He’s always afraid of confrontation, whether it’s with protesters at his speeches or with Hillary. Putin would probably walk all over him. I’m going to add this to the main post.
Lion of the Blogosphere
October 15, 2015 at 10:30 AM
Yes, many from his ethnic group, lack chutzpah, which is one of the reason for Meriprolestan’s downfall. This, I will write about. This is another reason why hardened Israelis, dislike their American counterparts.
JS
October 15, 2015 at 10:34 AM
Ironic that what anti-Semites think they hate about Jews, Bernie doesn’t even have enough of to defeat Hillary Clinton
Lion of the Blogosphere
October 15, 2015 at 10:35 AM
I agree that he is both a schmuck and afraid of confrontation. Being pushed away from his own microphone by the chubby BLM girls made him look extremely weak. But I don’t think he was ever running with the intention of being President. I think he just wanted to push the contest leftward. On that basis, he succeeded, but if he really wanted to be President he would have taken on the easy target that is scandal plagued Hillary Clinton.
Mike Street Station
October 15, 2015 at 10:39 AM
Jewish American elites (those who have the White majority at heart) aren’t aggressive enough to implement their motives. When you have a minority group that appears influential and destructive, it breeds resentment from the average person (anti-semitism in this case). And more to dislike them, because Jews tend to lean left, many in the ultra-left, and side with racial minorities that harm the White majority.
Radio talk show hosts like Michael Savage, who pound on the airwaves about the degenerative process of this country, aren’t really producing anything meaningful, when direct action is required.
JS
October 15, 2015 at 10:53 AM
He has no problem confronting a generalized notion of capitalism, the 1%, etc., but actual people? Yeah, you’re right.
Half Canadian
October 15, 2015 at 12:22 PM
He also campaigns against billionaires. But does anyone think that Bernie Sanders has the personal dominance to really face them down? Billionaires and CEOs tend to be tough, shrewd and persuasive. If Bernie can’t talk down Black Lives Matter protestors, how can we expect him to confront business leaders?
Sid
October 15, 2015 at 7:52 PM
I wouldn’t say Israelis dislike American Jews, they are just too different culturally being more like Americans in general and their particular interpretation of Jewishness is also a bit weird to the Israeli eyes. I guess Italians in America and in Italy probably feel the same way.
A jewish president can be a very tricky situation from an Israeli point of view. You can’t properly like him or hate him, there will be all kind of “he did it cause he is a Jew”, “self hating Jew” etc. Nothing good will come out of it. But it’s America’s business.
Hashed
October 15, 2015 at 8:31 PM
When you have a minority group that appears influential and destructive, it breeds resentment from the average person (anti-semitism in this case)
And when goy elites pursue exactly the same destructive policies Jewish elites are, the average goy has no moral standing to single out Jews for doing exactly what those elite goyim would have done on their own.
What policy differences are there between Hillary and Sanders?
The Undiscovered Jew
October 15, 2015 at 10:02 PM
He’s not a schmuck, and he’s not afraid of confrontation. He confronted the press for almost trampling that reporter after the debate. He’s just apparently not serious about wanting to become president. He ran to bring attention to certain issues, and he probably never expected to do as well as he has in the polls.
If he were serious, he would have attacked Clinton, like Mike says, and he didn’t.
Dave Pinsen
October 16, 2015 at 4:57 AM
TUJ — Many Goys today, in fact, don’t just single out elite Jews. They blame all the elites. I see it as an epic fail in Meriprolestan, when no one (pertaining to both Jewish and Goy citizens) dares to exact a wrong, done by our elites.
JS
October 16, 2015 at 10:08 AM
Bernie left NYC for Vermont after he went through the ’60’s.
The man is afraid of blacks. Period.
Trump is not.
If Bernie and Donald were in a school yard as kids, the black kids would pick on Bernie not Donald.
not too late
October 16, 2015 at 12:16 PM
My understanding of Bernie is he – as he said – “Let’s talk about the issues”. He doesn’t attack Hilary on the emails because it is unrelated to the policy. He seems to operate to the very idealistic principle of government by policy and thus the candidates evaluated by that including not evaluating – and not thus not bothering – character.
To be also add as well, he probably genuinely see the emails as all political. Something pushed as an avenue to take down Hilary than a real scandal. Bernie, as wanting to only view things in the lens of policies, thus say he doesn’t want to talk about that.
Dreamer
October 15, 2015 at 10:45 AM
From what I can tell, after years of reading run of the mill responses to political speech/psychology, a plurality of voters prefer politicians who are basically boring. However, when push comes to shove they want politicians who are pushy. Bernie is one of those people who would not only allow himself to be pushed, he’d get walked on. What does this say about the people of Vermont? Isn’t that place mostly made up of coaster throwaways?
cultural meat grinder
October 15, 2015 at 11:01 AM
Bernie’s socialism and his lack of desire/ability to be aggressive and confront those needing confronting go hand in hand.
Andrew E.
October 15, 2015 at 12:37 PM
Bernie Sanders has a brother…Larry, who is a politician in England.
The International Jew? Lol- can’t make this shit up.
While I’m not anti-semitic (multiple jewish friends), I do find it hard to believe the Sanders brothers have a connection to and love for the lands they want to represent. Seems more like a family vocation to me.
jjbees
October 15, 2015 at 12:56 PM
Larry lost his house of commons race.
uatu
October 15, 2015 at 9:16 PM
Larry lost his house of commons race.
David Milliband – recently replaced as Labour leader by the anti-semitic goy liberal Jeremy Corbin – not only lost to Cameron’s Tories, Milliband also lost British Jews to Cameron by nearly three to one. Of course this may not have been as substantial a swing as it sounds to Americans as British Jews have leaned Tory for decades. But a decent swing it nonetheless was:
Huge majority of British Jews will vote Tory, JC poll reveals
http://www.thejc.com/news/uk-news/133505/huge-majority-british-jews-will-vote-tory-jc-poll-reveals
British Jews will vote overwhelmingly for the Conservatives, an exclusive JC poll has revealed.
Asked who they would support in next month’s general election, 69 per cent of Jewish voters said they would support the Tories. Only 22 per cent said they would vote Labour.
David Cameron enjoys substantial personal support among the community. He was said to have the best attitude towards British Jewry by 64 per cent of people. Labour leader Ed Miliband was seen as the best supporter of the community by only 13 per cent.
Other parties including the Liberal Democrats and Ukip barely registered any support. Two per cent said they would support the Lib Dems, slightly ahead of those planning to vote for Ukip.
In the election campaign’s second week, the only accurate polling of the voting intentions of the Jewish community showed Israel and the Middle East would feature highly at the ballot box.
Around 73 per cent of Jews said the political parties’ attitudes to Israel were “very” or “quite” important in influencing how they would vote.
The polling revealed that Mr Miliband’s approach to Israel and the Middle East is seen as toxic within the Jewish community. Just 10 per cent of people said he had the best approach, compared to 65 per cent who favoured Mr Cameron’s stance.
The Undiscovered Jew
October 15, 2015 at 10:38 PM
Bernie did win the debate but the media will spin it to Hillary’s advantage because not even the liberal media is not liberal enough to embrace a socialist candidate.
I wish Obama would endorse Bernie and campaign for him in South Carolina. With Obama’s support Bernie could win the black vote & defeat Hillary.
In my opinion Obama is scared to death Hillary will be the next president, but be doesn’t think Bernie is electable and thus Obama is probably trying to push Biden to run.
pumpkinperson
October 15, 2015 at 1:21 PM
Why can’t we be given a perfect populist? Bernie had the chutzpah (that means “balls” right?) to advocate for less legal immigration. There was no mention of that in the debate.
Dave
October 15, 2015 at 1:24 PM
“Bernie’s big fault is that he’s afraid of confrontation.”
I think it was Peggy Noonan who recently wrote of Ronald Reagan that he never went negative, never said nasty things about people, always acted graciously toward even his staunchest opponents. Of course, he was also senile, but not everybody knew that.
Mark Caplan
October 15, 2015 at 1:46 PM
The chances are that we still end up with that old hag as our president no matter what. If Jeb Bush is the nominee, he’s far too much of a milquetoast to go after her, and if it’s Trump, the media will savage him: “oooh, he’s a meany, he hit a girrrlll.”
I have trouble envisioning any scenario, short of an incapacitating illness, where she does not become president. The media will put as heavy a thumb as they think necessary on the scale of news coverage, and in any state where the vote is even close the DNC will lawyer up, filing lawsuits and and demanding recount after recount until the “correct” result is achieved.
If Trump somehow is the GOP nominee and loses to Clinton under the circumstances I’ve described above, the RNC reaction will be “tisk tisk, gosh isn’t that just too bad. Well the people have spoken.”
Sgt. Joe Friday
October 15, 2015 at 2:15 PM
The chances are that we still end up with that old hag as our president no matter what. If Jeb Bush is the nominee, he’s far too much of a milquetoast to go after her, and if it’s Trump, the media will savage him: “oooh, he’s a meany, he hit a girrrlll.”
Yeah that sounds about right – Donald Trump will be intimidated by the media into being timid toward Hilary Clifton.
Where have you been?
Trump is obviously going to be the next president. He will KILL Clinton with the male vote of all races. He wont back down from going after Clinton at all.
Not only that but when the liberal feminist Democrats say he is picking on poor little Hillary he will say we need a tough president and that if she can’t handle Trump’s attacks how can she handle Putin. ISIL, Iran etc etc.
Rifleman
October 15, 2015 at 11:04 PM
Honestly, I don’t think Sanders cares if he wins. I think he’s accomplished what he set out to do, pull Hillary left on issues like free college, attacking the 1 percent, Wall Street and banks. Voting against TPP. Against Keystone Pipeline, inequality and so on…
George
October 15, 2015 at 2:36 PM
Don’t forget the NRA.
So Bernie’s goal was to make Hillary even less attractive to even more people?
Interesting.
not too late
October 16, 2015 at 12:22 PM
Sanders answered “Black Lives Matter” when asked to choose between that and “All Lives Matter” in a forced pithy answer.
Pretty sure that alienated a lot of centrists.
Dain
October 15, 2015 at 2:49 PM
The only reason they let Sanders run is to make Hillary look younger.
BB753
October 15, 2015 at 3:36 PM
Putin would walk all over Sanders because he’s a wuss. But Putin would walk all over Hillary because he’s got so much stuff on her (much of it from diverted emails) that she couldn’t afford to challenge him. If standing up to Putin (or Xi or the Castros or some other dictator) is the concern, Trump wins hands down.
BlackDeath
October 15, 2015 at 5:33 PM
Agreeing with some commenters, I think that Bernie’s big fault is that he’s afraid of confrontation.
And there you have why Hillary will be the nominee; how will Sanders defeat someone who’s at least ten times more likely to assassinate her enemies than Putin?
The Undiscovered Jew
October 15, 2015 at 6:32 PM
Sanders is trying too hard to be ‘cordial.’ Voters are mad and they want a mad candidate. He needs to go after Hillary for her neoliberal record and distance himself from Obama’s leniency toward Wall Street and ineffectiveness in economic reform. He needs to hammer economic issues 24/7 and act truly adversarial both to the rich AND to the Democratic establishment — being adversarial to the Republican establishment is what boosted Trump far more than being adversarial to any further-left ‘opponents.’
chairman
October 15, 2015 at 8:02 PM
The media tricked Bernie and the others to say Blacklivesmatter. They gave Hillary a pass. They were trying to be clever and get those blacks to believe they support them while not having Hillary damaged by alienating other voters when she gets to the election. Bernie doesn’t seem too interested in winning. Hillary would do pretty much everything he would do. He might even get a cabinet position if he lays off and lets her get crowned. Those feminist bitches are gonna scream if a woman doesn’t get the nod this time.
Joshua Sinistar
October 15, 2015 at 8:05 PM
Let the harpies scream.
not too late
October 16, 2015 at 12:28 PM
“He was afraid to confront obnoxious protesters at his campaign events,”
Well, it was BLM. I’m a bit afraid of those sistahs too…Damn fugly.
Bored
October 15, 2015 at 11:07 PM
Reagan took office when he was 69. His age was the butt of jokes at the time. Yet Trump is 69 and nothing has been mentioned about his age. That’s probably because Hillary turns 68 in 2 weeks. And, of course, Sanders will be 75 by election day. That’s two years older than Reagan was when started his second term. It’s hard to bash your opponent’s age when you’re old yourself.
destructure
October 15, 2015 at 11:31 PM
There were some younger guys like O’Malley, but seriously, will the voters turn out for him over Trump?
not too late
October 16, 2015 at 12:31 PM
Also, does Trump’s reputation for being rude to women help him or hurt him with blacks and hispanics?
not too late
October 16, 2015 at 12:32 PM
OT:
rivelino
October 16, 2015 at 3:20 PM
Social mobility can of course be regulated too. Few of the heavy hitter finishing schools admit purely on intelligence (e.g., Harvard does not).
Glengarry
October 17, 2015 at 8:42 AM
Awkward but inescapable: the more social mobility, the more social class will correlate with intelligence.
Then to crush social mobility once and for all, the intelligent will have to be destroyed.
The Undiscovered Jew
October 16, 2015 at 8:05 PM
O/T – But a LoftB topic, no less:
http://www.businessinsider.com/mark-zuckerbergs-failed-100-million-donation-to-newark-public-schools-2015-9
Zuckerberg’s donation to aid failing schools in Newark, NJ, becomes a complete failure, when you take a combo effect of value transference and HBD, into consideration. His money never trickled down to the kids, it was all skimmed off by “consultants”.
JS
October 17, 2015 at 10:46 AM
Lion I sort of agree with you that Bernie isn’t willing to fight hard enough, but attacking Hillary would be absolutely anathema to the whole party and what it stands for.. He would be slitting his own throat and he knows that. Rallying around Hillary in the time of this “right wing witch hunt” is the core of what the Democratic Party is in 2015. It’s like the California gubernatorial recall in 2003–like Gray Davis or hate him, if you were a remotely loyal Democrat you stood up and opposed the recall or your name was mud.
If anyone had gone after her on the ethics/emails/Benghazi/whatever, they would have completely lost the Democratic base for the remainder of the cycle.
Martin L.
October 17, 2015 at 2:58 PM
TRUMP won the Democrat debate.
http://insider.foxnews.com/2015/10/14/trump-picked-more-followers-during-debate-all-dems-combined
Glengarry
October 18, 2015 at 11:46 AM
WaPo, 10/24/15 – A high school teacher helps clarify ‘socialism’ for Donald Trump (and you!)
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2015/10/24/a-high-school-teacher-helps-clarify-socialism-for-donald-trump-and-you/
…”When we teach about the different types of economies,” Waite said, “the first thing we do is we talk about economic questions. How is it made? Who makes it? Who gets to buy it? Based on the economy, different people answer those questions.”
Simplifying Quill’s explanation: “In a communist country, the government answers those questions. There’s no private business. There’s no private property. The government decides.”
“In a capitalist society, the people make those decisions. The businesses, the market decides how much products will cost, how many there are, where it will be made.”
“In the socialist system, there’s a mix of both. The government operates the system to help all, but there is opportunity for private property and private wealth. That’s generally how we talk about it.” Back to Quill’s point: A socialist government could control all of the means of production — or it could, for example, use taxes to redistribute resources among the population.
Both Quill and Waite note that the United States is not a purely capitalist society. There are and have long been socialist aspects to how the government makes decisions and applies its power, while still striving to keep the marketplace as free as possible. And, of course, while allowing democratic decisions to guide what it does…
E. Rekshun
October 24, 2015 at 1:16 PM