@blatham,
Quote:This is obviously most acutely a problem for Sanders given the campaign's long-running assertion that he will get this contingent active as voters.
from the Goldberg column I posted yesterday:
Quote:According to Broockman and Kalla’s figures, Sanders loses a significant number of swing votes to Trump, but he makes up for them in support from young people who say they won’t vote, or will vote third party, unless Sanders is the nominee. On the surface, these Bernie-or-bust voters might seem like an argument for Sanders. After all, Sanders partisans sometimes insist that Democrats have no choice but to nominate their candidate because they’ll stay home otherwise, a sneering imitation of traditional centrist demands for progressive compromise.
But if Broockman and Kalla are right, by nominating Sanders, Democrats would be trading some of the electorate’s most reliable voters for some of its least. To prevail, Democrats would need unheard-of rates of youth turnout. That doesn’t necessarily mean Sanders would be a worse candidate than Joe Biden, given all of Biden’s baggage. It does mean polls might be underestimating how hard it will be for Sanders to beat Trump.
https://able2know.org/topic/468987-755#post-6967700
Biden's win in Texas was interesting, as the Sanders camp was acting as if the Hispanic vote was a sure thing.
Biden's win in Massachusetts was amazing, as he had no ground game there at all.
And in Maine, Sanders beat Hillary in a landslide in '16. This year, again with no ground game, Biden managed to beat him, just barely.
Sara Gideon looks well-positioned to beat Susan Collins (finally).
And an attempt to repeal the state's new law requiring kids be vaccinated to attend school, with no religious or philosophical exemptions allowed, was handily defeated, by nearly three to one.
