3 ms·

As an outsider, I am having troubles understanding why the Democrats put against Trump the only candidate who had a poor enough track record to make this electi

by atmosx 10y ago

As an outsider, I am having troubles understanding why the Democrats put against Trump the only candidate who had a poor enough track record to make this election "interesting". Why didn't they choose Sanders who is not as vulnerable as Hilton? By they I mean the Democrat elite.

qntty 10y ago
You're right, polls showed that Sanders would do better than Clinton against Trump. The Democratic elite doesn't want Sanders because he doesn't represent their interests. BTW, you should know that, at this point, the election is basically over and Clinton has won. This election is far too polarizing for the kind of swing Trump would need to win (people who still have hope for Trump are basically hoping for a Brexit scenario where polls significantly underestimate his support). So their strategy worked, even if it was risky.
gjolund 10y ago
Because this has nothing to do with democracy. Who needs votes when MSM, FB, Google, and Twitter are all pushing your agenda?
OmarIsmail 10y ago
This is a common misconception. Look at how much stuff has come out from Trump's past. You probably thought Trump went through lots of vetting in the primaries, but the reality is that it was super light. The same thing is true of Sanders. Clinton went very easy on him and stayed positive for pretty much the entire primaries. The republicans would not have been as nice. I actually think that Clinton was the best choice against Trump because she is so thoroughly vetted. There's effectively nothing that could come out that we don't already know. Any other candidate could have a myriad of skeletons in their closets that would only come out with well resourced oppo. That's not even including Sanders' proposals that would result in a decent tax hike on middle class families. Republicans would have pushed that HARD and you have no idea how that would have been received.

by atmosx 10y ago

qntty 10y ago

You're right, polls showed that Sanders would do better than Clinton against Trump. The Democratic elite doesn't want Sanders because he doesn't represent their interests. BTW, you should know that, at this point, the election is basically over and Clinton has won. This election is far too polarizing for the kind of swing Trump would need to win (people who still have hope for Trump are basically hoping for a Brexit scenario where polls significantly underestimate his support). So their strategy worked, even if it was risky.

gjolund 10y ago

Because this has nothing to do with democracy. Who needs votes when MSM, FB, Google, and Twitter are all pushing your agenda?

OmarIsmail 10y ago

This is a common misconception. Look at how much stuff has come out from Trump's past. You probably thought Trump went through lots of vetting in the primaries, but the reality is that it was super light. The same thing is true of Sanders. Clinton went very easy on him and stayed positive for pretty much the entire primaries. The republicans would not have been as nice. I actually think that Clinton was the best choice against Trump because she is so thoroughly vetted. There's effectively nothing that could come out that we don't already know. Any other candidate could have a myriad of skeletons in their closets that would only come out with well resourced oppo. That's not even including Sanders' proposals that would result in a decent tax hike on middle class families. Republicans would have pushed that HARD and you have no idea how that would have been received.