First you claim that I presented no facts, and now you are submitting that the facts I presented are not salient. I’m sensing shifting goalposts here. Anyway:

Diversity: you’re entirely correct that Mr. Sanders’ supporters span a broader racial spectrum. But your own source ALSO declares that his support is narrowly confined to young people. There are many dimensions of diversity.

Young people who are less likely to vote in the general election if their candidate is not nominated, whereas older Democratic voters are more likely to vote regardless of the nominee. The likely-voter demographic looks very different for the general election versus the primary, especially with a candidate like Sanders in the race.

Consistency: Yes, Mr. Sanders has been more consistent than Ms. Warren. So what? The point is without significance.

You’ve got to be kidding. This IS significant because a substantial number of voters simply do not trust Warren. One day she’s for M4A, the next she’s back tracking. Sometimes she’s against corporate donations, but then she’s using stock of donations from a previous campaign which included corporate money. Sanders has been reliable for over 40 years. Much of the time Warren represents the waffling politician who will put on a good front and then back off behind closed doors. She’s the sort of candidate millions of voters are disillusioned with.

Donors: Yes, that much was obvious to me. But I fail to see much significance to it.

The question was about grass roots energy. Individual donations and volunteering are significant marker of grassroots energy.

Actually, my point is that Mr. Sanders’ policies are more EXTREME than Ms. Warren’s; specifically, they are futile gestures in symbolism that will never amount to anything, because they will never get through Congress.

I think your idea of politics is stuck somewhere in the 1990’s. There is NO compromise in Congress, especially on the big issues. And there will be none, regardless of who is president. Warren is not getting more Republican votes for Medicare for Most People or Something than Sanders is for M4A. Obama did get a single Republican vote for the ACA, which was initially a REPUBLICAN idea. The ONLY way to pass significant legislation is to put a bold idea on the table which will benefit the most possible people, and leverage that public support within your own party. The era of Blue Dog Democrats is over.

Rallies: Yes, Mr. Sanders had one rally that was bigger than Ms. Warren’s. So what?

Again, the question was about grass roots support and energy. Large rallies are a marker of that. We disregarded Trump’s rallies in 2016 because they are an unscientific measure, but we failed to recognize the significance of an excited base in terms of voter turnout.

a) Ms. Warren leads Mr. Sanders in the polls; and b) they show equal leads over Mr. Trump.

She leads Sanders in Democratic Primary polls, which are a VERY different demographic to the general. As a side note, Sanders typically edges Warren in the head to head match-ups versus Trump.

At some level here we have to delve into the realm of ‘opinion’, because hypotheticals cannot fully be fleshed out with tangible ‘objective facts’. Do you really imagine that Warren will fare well against Trump in a general election? Warren is exactly the sort of candidate Trump feasts on. Elite, liberal, and highly educated. She comes off as ‘upper class’. To Republicans, she will be Hilary 2.0. Sanders on the other hand is gruff and actually somewhat disheveled. Nobody can doubt his earnestness and consistency. In reality he is wealthy but he does not seem that way. He’s far easier for your average general election voter to identify with. He’s the sort of candidate of which a Republican voter might say “I disagree with his policies, but he seems honest”. I’ve seen this repeated many, many times online, and my own mother (a devout Republican) has said as much. On the other hand, Warren is viscerally despised by many of those same people due to the way she presents.

Whether one candidate’s policies are slightly more progressive is completely immaterial to Republican voters. The way voters feel about a candidate on a personal level is the determining factor. Sanders has the benefit of both being more progressive and tolerable to non-Democratic Primary voters. Sanders consistently tops Warren in favorability ratings (1) (2) (3). Trump will be able to whip up his supporters in a frenzy against Warren given their baseline dislike of her. Sanders is more poised to expose Trump as a fraud.

Corporate accountant and former auditor with degrees in philosophy and accounting.

Get the Medium app

A button that says 'Download on the App Store', and if clicked it will lead you to the iOS App store
A button that says 'Get it on, Google Play', and if clicked it will lead you to the Google Play store