Bernie Sanders v. Hillary v. McCain?

Let's look into the future and predict that Bernie Sanders is elected to the US Senate from Vermont as an independent in '06 and that Hillary Clinton becomes the Democratic nominee in '08. In the general election, would you vote for Bernie Sanders as an Independent or Green candidate for President rather than Hillary? Let's make it more fun and say the GOP nominee is John McCain.

Here's a link to Sanders on wikipedia for those who are less familiar with him:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bernie_Sanders

I'm wondering how many DUers intensely dislike Hillary, and to what degree people value loyalty to party over loyalty to ideals.

It's that I LOVE Bernie!:P

From the position of US Senator, I think it would make him one of the very few progressives who could run a credible third party campaign from the left. Most don't have the kind of money, organization, name recognition or credibility to pull it off. That's what made me think of this scenario even though I have no reason to think he would do it.

independent it would have the same effect as Nader did in 2000. In this race, we'd wind up with McCain in the WH, as the Dem vote would be split between Hillary and Bernie.

she's an opportunist

I'd vote for Bernie in a heartbeat

McCain-I'd vote for Hillary

party candidtate too... According to some British news article I read a few weeks ago here. If that were the case, then there would be two third party candidates taking votes away from both major party candidates. This could theoretically lead to a victory for a third party candidate-say, Sanders...

That would at least be the most interesting and democratic Presidential election in many years.

answer the question. Nor can you. Not enough information exists at this time. It would probably depend on what else the race looked like. If Hillary had a lock, than sure, a vote for Sanders would be reasonable as a protest vote. Contrariwise, if Sanders really had a chance????

Then again, I would not be out to support a Nadar like spoiler.

Then again, I'm in a relatively red state without many electoral votes, so who knows.

EXCEPT THAT YOUR QUESTION IS NEARLY MEANINGLESS AT THIS TIME.

thinking of such hypothetical situations as a distraction. You're correct that this, and all other Presidential polls on DU, are meaningless if those candidates aren't actually chosen.
My personal thinking is that Hillary would have no chance unless the GOP candidate really screwed it up big time, so a third party candidate would be the only hope for progressives.

people on here would actually vote for an Independent instead of a Democrat, whoever it is, in 2008? And help McCain win?

You people really want 4 or 8 more years of Republcan rule?

Fuck.

Some people are more loyal to their ideals than they are to a party structure that isn't always loyal to them.

You'd vote for the Independent and essentially secure 4 or more years of Republican rule because your precious ideals can't be forced to vote for the DEMOCRAT (you know, the candidate with the best chance of winning)?

Hillary has no chance of winning then voting for a third party doesn't throw anything to the Republicans. I think the party also has to start facing the reality of third party liberal swing voters, as well as the moderate swing voters. That is now part of what makes one electable. If nominating Hillary means a third party will gain a large amount of support, then she isn't electable, no matter how moderate she is.

Skinner et al should take note of what is brewing at DU.

I am curious as to what countermeasures you propose, I am aware of your proclivity to the 'Third Way'...

I do not understand the "proclivity" you are referring to/allege, or is this just a hit and run comment that makes sense only to you?

I would and will vote for the Democrat. Period.

I had thought you were enamored of the DLC, which has often referred to themselves as the "third way" if I was mistaken, I apologize. From your participation in the slug fests centering around the DLC I had somehow gained the impression that you were sympathetic to them.

I actually thought the statement was completely coherent, but apparently I have a communication issue nowadays. As it obviously aggravated you, I shall attempt to be somewhat more selective in addressing comments to you in the future. Again, my apologies, Madam.

That's what comes up when you Google it. That's why I was confused, not sensitive, just didn't understand what you meant. :)

I don't support the DLC at all, I just don't support purging them from the party because I think everybody's voice should be heard. Sometimes people misconstrue that thinking it's an either/or issue. My world isn't that black and white; I am more of a live and let live kind of person. I pretty much ignore the DLC.

I support Al Gore, but will vote for whomever gets the Dem Party nod in the general, perhaps holding my nose, but I'll do it. It's the only viable way we have to get rid of the Republicans in power.

If this large a percentage of DU members would choose an Independent candidate over a Democrat (there's even a few votes for McCain--unbelievable), and essentially ensure a Republican victory, we have far bigger problems than any amount of DLC-bashing could ever "solve".

> Skinner et al should take note of what is brewing at DU.

You mean the same thing that's happening at the state parties?
That Democrats are starting to expect their candidates to act
like both Democrats and democrats, and are starting to hold the
Democrats who don't act like Democrats (or democrats) accountable
for their actions?

Golly, that sounds awful! :sarcasm:

If you let that sort of thing start going on un-checked, you
might actually have Democratic candidates actually standing
for something, and who knows where *THAT* might lead???
(Important hint: Democrats who actually stand for Democratic/
democratic values will probably sound a lot like Bernie Sanders
and not much like Hillary Clinton.)

Tesha

Loved your lecture, especially the sarcasm thingie which is, like, so original, but a quick perusal of the DU mission statement, which is available to read if you are interested, outlines the purpose and mission of DU. This poll was a barometer of the intentions of you and others and is something DU should take note of because it's, like, not even close to moving within the guidelines. Now I realize folks like you take every opportunity to lecture others on your oh so superior point of view, but perhaps this isn't the venue to propose a third party bolt. Here's a happy face for you :).

> DU prohibits shilling for third parties.

What are you talking about???

*I* am talking about what happened at my very own state Democratic
Party convention a weekend ago. (You can find my description of events
somewhere in the General Discussion archives.)

We made it clear to our party hierarchy that the time of "business as
usual" was over, and that from now on, we wanted Democrats that
behaved like Democrats and members of a true opposition party,
and not as appeasers of the Republicans.

Are you sure you still want to lecture me now?

Tesha

I would not feel a particularly strong sense of obligation to vote for Hillary if she were nominated. Don't get me wrong, I desperately want to vote for the Democratic nominee, but they will have to earn my vote.

I would love to be able to cast a vote for Sanders. He is a GREAT man.

n/t

in that role.

I can't play along because I just am not seeing the possibility of his being elected in 06 to the Senate and then vying for the White House two years later.

It throws off the poll completely for me.

I think McCain's health and possibly Senator Hagel are going to dramatically reduce his chances at the GOP nomination.

And I believe Senator Clinton will read the tea leaves a week or so before the Iowa caucuses and withdraw from the race.

Clinton.

Or does that argument only work against the more-progressive
candidate?

Tesha

seeing that argument turned back on people who dismiss third parties.
BTW, I'm jealous of you living in the first primary state.

Unless political reality drastically changes between now and Nov. 2008 to make Bernie Sanders a viable presidential candidate.

I'd love to see someone like Bernie Sanders as president, but that's what the other side refers to as a "30 year project."

I'll vote for my ideal candidate in the Democratic primary. It is very doubtful that person will be Hillary Clinton. In the general election, I'll vote for the best candidate with a reasonable chance to win. In my lifetime of voting (since 1992), that has always been the Democratic nominee. If the Democratic candidate had no plausible chance (like in 1984), and I liked another candidate to his/her left better, then maybe. Otherwise, nope. After 8 years of Bush, I don't feel like throwing an election to the Republicans in order to protest Hillary or any other reasonably superior Democratic candidate. Hillary Clinton is not my ideal candidate, but she'd be a welcome change from 8 years of the Republicans in the White House and a relief from the prospect of 4 more.

He is more liberal than most Dems

this approach.

He strongly disagreed with Clinton but still backed his reelection in 1996 and 2000 even though Ralph Nader is a personal friend. In his own state of Vermont he is backing the Democratic candidate for Congress for the seat to replace him and is asking the Vermont Progressive Party not to field a candidate. He has developed close connections with the Democratic Party leadership. He needs to in order to be affective.

There is simply no possibility whatsoever of this happening; none whatsoever.

Frankly my hope is that he will at some point register Democrat and seek the Presidency if not in 2008 (that I think is unlikely) then at some future date.

If Bernie at some point registers Democrat and then seeks the nomination - he could actually win. This is very possible. Think about it. This is actually possible. Under this scenario Bernie Sanders could someday actually be President of the United States.

Beside when was the last time a non-Democrat or non-Republican won the Presidency?

Answer:

Zachary Taylor - 1848

Great guy and he will make a great Senator but he's not nationally known.

we shouldn't nominate a Democrat so moderate/conservative that they will split the Dem vote?

The System to attract/build/form/keep GOOD CIVIC LEADERS have yet to be implemented...someday perhaps...times a ticking...

what this post is supposed to mean.

Voting for Bernie will only help McCain.

She's not my first choice, but a vote for Sanders would be a vote for the Republican. I don't know how any Democrat could vote for McCain.

I'd vote for Bernie.

If only more democrats had as much sense.

so would I.

McCain would never support a democrat.