Probably quite easily, as there are a few important points to consider:
1: Democratic turnout was awful--as was GOP turnout--and Clinton wicked underperformed, so it is likely Sanders could not have managed to do any worse meaning that Sanders would have won every state Clinton won;
2: Sanders would have also won Michigan, Wisconsin, Ohio, and Pennsylvania because he would have blunted or completely counteracted Trump's appeal to the marginalized crackers;
3: Sanders would have won Florida because of Jewish.
That's that.
Plus, as the results down-ballot showed once again, people tend to vote the party line; Sanders would have delivered Senators in PA and WI and FL. North Carolina might have been bigger for the Dems with Sanders running, so maybe that Senate seat would have delivered, too.
President-Elect Sanders would have had a much better chance of flipping the House on the way to victory as well. Clinton ran an abysmal campaign, and the Dems in general were total shit. Sanders would have been much stronger, energizing not only the base voters who would vote for a chicken salad sandwich if it had a D after it--and did, essentially voting for a chickenshit salad sandwich named Hillary Clinton--but also expanding the Obama electorate with a popular, centrist message including labor rights and civil rights and women's rights that the neoliberal asshole HRC would never have embraced--and didn't which is why nobody came out to vote for her that wasn't a brainless D-zombie.
The GOP would have labeled Sanders a socialist a communist a leftist unamerican, but so what? They called the rock-ribbed conservatives Obama and Bill Clinton all those things, and it didn't matter because the only voters dumb enough to listen to or care about that horseshit would never vote for a Dem in a billion years. Those marginalized white idiots who were the difference in the 2016 election because of the historically low turnout on both sides voted for Obama in 2008 and 2012 and many more of them would have voted for Sanders because there are simply more eligible voters than back then.
No comments:
Post a Comment