• FlowVoid@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    3 hours ago

    Bernie can’t bring out people who don’t vote. If he could, he would have won a lot more votes in Vermont.

    • grue@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      2 hours ago

      Okay, I need you to understand something: not voting in a primary is not the same thing as not voting in the general election. That goes double for the kinds of people who are pissed off at the two-party system in general.

      Do you realize how fundamentally stupid it is to respond to the argument “Bernie was capable of winning the general election precisely because he would appeal to the kinds of people who don’t vote in Democratic primaries” by saying “but if he can’t even win the primary how could he win the general election?”

      • FlowVoid@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        1 hour ago

        I’m not talking about the primary. I’m talking about the general election we just held. There were plenty of Senators running for re-election, including Bernie.

        Nearly all of those Senators won more votes than Harris. In other words nearly all won over Harris voters and won over some non-Harris voters on top of that.

        But not Bernie. Unlike the other Senators, he failed to outperform Harris. So it’s clear he doesn’t have some magical power to win the votes of people who don’t vote for Democrats. Quite the opposite, in fact.

        • grue@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          36 minutes ago

          His opponent also failed to outperform Trump – in other words, there were fewer total votes cast for that race than there were for President, i.e. some people just voted for President and left the rest of the ballot blank. As for percentages, Sanders was within a percent of Harris, which sounds like statistical noise to me.

          On top of that, what matters to this conversation is how people in states Trump won would behave, not how people in Vermont would behave. Vermont is less unequal and less impoverished than most other US states, so there’s plenty of reason to think that his platform would be even more popular in places other than Vermont, if those voters had the chance to actually hear about it.