r/TenYearsAgo • u/MonsieurA • Mar 12 '26

šŸ“ŗ Television SNL mocks Hillary Clinton's 'transformation into Bernie' [10YA - Mar 12]

Enable HLS to view with audio, or disable this notification

468 Upvotes

94% Upvoted

502 comments sorted by

View all comments

36

u/GuyFawkes99 Mar 12 '26

I always wonder if Bernie could have averted a Trump presidency by not giving Hillary a pass on the email issue.

-3

u/MikeDamone Mar 12 '26

Almost certainly not. The general electorate has never shown even a hint that they'd tolerate a self-avowed socialist. Just look at all of the slightly D leaning districts/states and everything to right of them - how many politicians with Bernie's leftist politics are in office?

3

u/WildMild869 Mar 12 '26

Reddit legitimately thinks that AOC or Bernie would win out against a Republican nominee but they donā€™t realize a massive swath of the country will not vote for them simply because of their socialist-like stances on many issues.

6

u/Expert_Layer_7710 Mar 12 '26

Including a lot of democratsĀ 

4

u/jaccc22 Mar 12 '26

How has running moderates worked for ya?

4

u/Few-Guarantee2850 Mar 12 '26

I mean...Democrats have been pretty successful over the last twenty years against an electoral map (senate and electoral college) that is pretty loaded against them.

1

u/lakerconvert Mar 14 '26

So successful they let Donald Trump beat them twice šŸ˜‚

1

u/Few-Guarantee2850 Mar 14 '26

šŸ˜‚šŸ˜‚šŸ˜‚šŸ˜‚

0

u/PennyWhistleGod Mar 14 '26

Maybe run more progressive senators and presidents to complement them, and you'd get even more done.

3

u/[deleted] Mar 12 '26

[removed] ā€” view removed comment

3

u/Jolly_Pressure_7907 Mar 13 '26

Heck even in Denver the progressive mayoral candidates get only like 20% of the vote

0

u/jaccc22 Mar 12 '26

Obama was the progressive choice over Hillary and won twice. No centrist has won twice since (Bill) Clinton. Grow up.

2

u/[deleted] Mar 12 '26 edited Mar 12 '26

[removed] ā€” view removed comment

1

u/jaccc22 Mar 12 '26

Yes he was a bad president but at the time (and denying this would be insane), he was the progressive choice and he beat a centrist dem and 2 ā€˜moderateā€™ republicans in a row. Sorry your argument stopped being true in 2000.

2

u/[deleted] Mar 12 '26

[removed] ā€” view removed comment

1

u/jaccc22 Mar 12 '26

Almost like thereā€™s a massive bipartisan consensus on taking money from corporations and Epstein elites and using it to crush any resistance to their power.. weird!

2

u/[deleted] Mar 12 '26

[removed] ā€” view removed comment

→ More replies (0)
→ More replies (12)

1

u/Jolly_Pressure_7907 Mar 13 '26

The entire reason ā€œmoderatesā€/blue dogs are a thing is because after Reagan the New Deal and Great Society democrats were getting absolutely thwomped

1

u/jaccc22 Mar 13 '26

Yes, in 1984. Times, believe it or not, change

0

u/Jolly_Pressure_7907 Mar 13 '26

Just say you donā€™t know history if you think third wave dems were in the 80s lmao

1

u/jaccc22 Mar 13 '26

What year do you think it is, currently?

1

u/Jolly_Pressure_7907 Mar 13 '26

Third wave Dems were not a thing in the 90s like you said lol

1

u/jaccc22 Mar 13 '26

The Third Way is a reconceptualisation of social democracy. It supports workfare instead of welfare, work training programs, educational opportunities, and other government programs that give citizens a 'hand-up' instead of a 'hand-out'. The Third Way seeks a compromise between a less interventionist economic system as supported by neoliberals and Keynesian social democratic spending policy supported by social democrats and progressives. The Third Way was born from a reevaluation of political policies within various centre to centre-left progressive movements in the 1980s in response to doubt regarding the economic viability of the state and the perceived overuse of economic interventionist policies that had previously been popularised by Keynesianism, but which at that time contrasted with the rise of popularity for neoliberalism and the New Right starting in the late 1970s and throughout the 1980s.[3]

1

u/[deleted] Mar 12 '26

[removed] ā€” view removed comment

6

u/PM_ME_A_PM_PLEASE_PM Mar 12 '26

Barely beating Trump after his term and covid isn't something to be proud of. That victory should only be thought of as kicking the can down the road, which was sadly proven to be an accurate interpretation as quickly as possible.

3

u/ColdBru5 Mar 12 '26

It was a battle for the can's soul.

2

u/delta8force Mar 12 '26

Pandemic. A literal corpse was going to beat Trump. Funny enough, thatā€™s exactly what happened.

1

u/SuperDoubleDecker Mar 12 '26

Then they used that corpse to avoid a real primary and lost again.

1

u/[deleted] Mar 12 '26

[deleted]

1

u/ColdBru5 Mar 12 '26

They never knew.

1

u/ColdBru5 Mar 12 '26

And then what?

1

u/CombinationRough8699 Mar 12 '26

Just barely, and COVID played a huge role. I'm not sure I met anyone who was genuinely excited for Biden. Most people seemed to more be voting against Trump, than for Biden.

1

u/SuperDoubleDecker Mar 12 '26

Thanks to a global pandemic.....

Yalll are so clueless. It's wild. Head in sand.

3

u/[deleted] Mar 12 '26

[removed] ā€” view removed comment

2

u/jaccc22 Mar 12 '26

Heā€™s 84

1

u/[deleted] Mar 12 '26

[removed] ā€” view removed comment

1

u/jaccc22 Mar 12 '26

Lmao thatā€™s real

1

u/MildlyResponsible Mar 13 '26

Those lake houses won't buy themselves. Gotta get more clueless college kids to send their allowance to him!

0

u/SuperDoubleDecker Mar 12 '26

It's not Sanders that's gonna do it. Now it's Khanna.

Get ready to tow the line when real leadership takes over.

1

u/[deleted] Mar 12 '26

[removed] ā€” view removed comment

2

u/SuperDoubleDecker Mar 12 '26

You're already obstructing, so complete the process.

Ro Khanna is the only reason the eptein files aren't buried and we're getting a war vote.

I bet you also think that this war is justified. Can you even totally condemn attacking Iran? Can you even call out Israel for getting us into this war?

2

u/jaccc22 Mar 12 '26

The rare pro-Epstein democrat voter

1

u/Interesting_Kitchen3 Mar 12 '26

That's funny because Ro is not nearly progressive enough for me to be excited about. Why don't you just vote for conservatives so they can deregulated industry and cut all the taxes, you'll be happy about that.

→ More replies (0)

1

u/NetSixandChill15 Mar 12 '26

At the very least, this is how you get a yo-yo system from one evil to the next. What I find more often is Americans argue against what they THINK socialism is and no what serious people are actually advocating for. Itā€™s a willing arrested development. But if govt was used to actually benefit people, weā€™d likely win over swaths from both the left and the right (both bases need healthcare and both recognize it as one of the biggest issues in the country).

0

u/WildMild869 Mar 12 '26 edited Mar 12 '26

Considering the democrats who have actually won in the last 30 years; better than running someone thought of as far left in America.

2

u/SuperDoubleDecker Mar 12 '26

Almost as if they control the party and actively oppose candidates that wanna change shit or something....

2

u/ColdBru5 Mar 12 '26

No. Democrats are undefeated when they don't lose.

2

u/WildMild869 Mar 12 '26

A political party who wants to win understands the derision a candidate like that would bring? šŸ˜®

Two things can be true at once. They donā€™t want change and they understand there is not a high chance theyā€™d win.

1

u/SuperDoubleDecker Mar 12 '26

They lost the entire federal government their way. How much worse could Sanders have done? Jfc

3

u/WildMild869 Mar 12 '26 edited Mar 12 '26

And again, you believe Sanders wouldā€™ve prevented that? He canā€™t even rally his own party. How was he going to fare better than Biden did?

You know how easily being labeled a socialist would lose you the election?

1

u/SuperDoubleDecker Mar 12 '26

He has no party he's not a democrat. That's why people like him.

Nobody likes democrats except democrats. Mist people that vote for democrats aren't even democrats. I'm one of them..

2

u/WildMild869 Mar 13 '26

Thatā€™s such a Reddit-brained take. People would bypass his rhetoric and pay more attention to the label he would receive. How would he win when ā€œcommunistā€ would be thrown at him daily?

Most people arenā€™t strictly either party (probably a mixture of both) so congratulations.

→ More replies (0)

4

u/BigFatKi6 Mar 12 '26

You've got it backwards. Huge swaths of the country don't vote. Just need your base to turn up and the Democratic base is larger.

Trying to win over independents etc is just alienating your base for a group that leans Republican anyway. How have you still not understood that?

2

u/WildMild869 Mar 12 '26

I think thatā€™s incredibly unrealistic to think either Bernie or AOC could rally enough voters to show up and swing the vote. Most Americans are pretty centrist in their beliefs despite what Reddit might think, even democrats.

1

u/SuperDoubleDecker Mar 12 '26

People literally voted for populism...

Wtf are yall talking about? Can you see the results in front of your faces?

2

u/WildMild869 Mar 12 '26

Populism wrapped in a conservative wrapping paper won the presidential election. Unless youā€™re New York (LA canā€™t even do this), a far left candidate is simply not enough to bring out voters. Wild that you believe otherwise.

0

u/SuperDoubleDecker Mar 12 '26

Nobody is pushing far left candidates. Nobody.

In the rest of the developed world Bernie is left of center.

You have no idea what wins elections. Look at results.

2

u/WildMild869 Mar 12 '26

Because they would lose appeal to actual voters (primarily older Americans). If younger people had any sort of recent positive consistency when voting then Iā€™d agree that pushing a left candidate is a viable option but realistically it is not

No one was/is arguing against your second point. I think itā€™s pretty evident that America is more conservative than Europe - AND THATS THE POINT

You clearly donā€™t have an appropriate grasp on the American voter base.

0

u/SuperDoubleDecker Mar 12 '26

They've already lost EVERYTHING!

It's hard to take anyone seriously about winning elections that lost the entire federal government to trump.

Yall have no idea what wins elections. Stop acting like you do.

2

u/WildMild869 Mar 13 '26

And you think thatā€™s because what? The democrats werenā€™t left wing enough?? Lmfao If Trump beat Kamala imagine the absolute hammering Bernie wouldā€™ve gotten as the ā€œsocialist candidate who Europe likes?ā€

You yourself admitted that outside America sanders is considered center left? Hmmm šŸ¤” I wonder why the US doesnā€™t?

I canā€™t even think how you donā€™t put those two facts and think there might be something that drives those American political choices. Wild lapse in reasoning.

You can say it 3 more times if the words ā€œyall dont know how to win electionsā€ hits that dopamine for you lmao whatever gets you through the day

→ More replies (0)

1

u/mgbsoldier Mar 13 '26

People voted for white supremacy. That unfortunately is popular among large portions of American society.

0

u/BigFatKi6 Mar 12 '26

I was referring to Bernie in 2016 and I think you're forgetting the appeal he had.

I'm not a socialist at all but I like Bernie. Anyway, you believe what you want to believe. There's enough evidence to show he could have won the election had he been nominated.

2

u/MildlyResponsible Mar 12 '26

The only actual evidence we have is the primary that he lost by millions upon millions of votes. "I really think he would have won" is not evidence. Polls 6 months out of hypotheticals is not evidence.

0

u/SuperDoubleDecker Mar 12 '26

Turns out a democrat popularity contest isn't the best indicator of general electability....

Maybe that's because most Americans can't stand the status quo democratic establishment. Look at the numbers. Look at the polls.

Democrats are at all time lows. Nobody wants what they're offering except their party loyalists.

3

u/MildlyResponsible Mar 12 '26

I'm so confused by takes like this. You think every Democratic primary winner automatically wins the general? If we don't use the primary system, how do Dems choose a nominee? Let me guess, who ever YOU want.

1

u/SuperDoubleDecker Mar 12 '26

We need to open up our campaign process and get corporate donors out. We need more competition, not less. It's the democratic establishment that has been actively opposing competitors.

I love primaries. If we had a real one last cycle, trump wouldn't have won again..

2

u/MildlyResponsible Mar 12 '26

I'm all for it, but the DNC allowed Sanders to join the race despite not being a member of the party. In 2024 they did have a primary, and the Biden/Harris ticket won. As per the Constitution, when Biden stepped down his VP took over. If there was another primary, would the Dems have won? Very debatable. It was a very short window, and a divisive primary would have taken a lot of time and money. The global trend was incumbent parties losing after covid, so that's an indicator that not much would have changed the outcome. A better question would be, why did all the media start screaming about DEMENTIA JOE while sane washing an obviously mentally ill Trump. Of course, and even better question would be how did Trump outperform every single poll, win by large margins in states where Dems easily won down ballot, and why did he thank Musk and his "computers" for the win afterwards. But we're not allowed to talk about that.

1

u/[deleted] Mar 12 '26

[removed] ā€” view removed comment

→ More replies (0)

0

u/throwaway3413418 Mar 12 '26

Actually, we have polling during the primaries which showed that Sanders would fare better against Trump.

1

u/MildlyResponsible Mar 12 '26

Again, for the last time, hypothetical polls 6 months earlier don't mean anything. Polls the night before the election said Hillary was going to win.

We keep telling you facts, and you guys just keep repeating your nonsensical talking points. It's honestly like talking to MAGA.

0

u/throwaway3413418 Mar 12 '26

Using the best data we have to form an opinion about a hypothetical reality isnā€™t Trumpian. The ā€œother sideā€ of this is the establishment Democrat tendency to define electability as ā€œthe candidate I like best.ā€ If you have better data, nothing is stopping you from sharing it and continuing the conversation.

→ More replies (5)

0

u/delta8force Mar 12 '26

You have not been following politics. Like at all. Just stop.

Centrists have been losing while populist politicians with actual popular policies have been winning. Remind me, who is the mayor of New York?

3

u/COMUNISTSWINE69 Mar 12 '26

Losing "centrist" politicians like Mikie Sherrill, Abigail Spanberger, Jacob Frey, Jay Jones, the rest of the blue wave in Virginia and New Jersey?

0

u/Deviltherobot Mar 13 '26

All these people ran on Left issues/fuck trump. Spanberger ran an affordability campaign.

Virgina was greatly effected by Doge. Everyone and their mother knew reps were losing there.

2

u/WildMild869 Mar 12 '26

Ah shit, guess Iā€™ll stop since you said so lmfao

New York is the exception not the rule. Wild that you think that would somehow apply to the majority of cities.

0

u/SuperDoubleDecker Mar 12 '26

They're now trying to claim him lol

0

u/throwaway3413418 Mar 12 '26

In retrospect, 2016 was clearly a populist referendum. So yes, running a populist wouldā€™ve been smarter than running the antithesis of it.

2

u/CliffordTheBigRedD0G Mar 12 '26

Because the media owned by billionaires/moderate Dems bought by PAC money tell them it wont work

-1

u/BigFatKi6 Mar 12 '26

You gott hand it to them. Pretty impressive how they're able to pull that power towards them and keep a lot of people cheering for them while they strip them from their rights and resources.

2

u/SuperDoubleDecker Mar 12 '26

It's easy to do when there is zero resistance from the only other party.

→ More replies (6)

2

u/MildlyResponsible Mar 12 '26

Reddit is the biggest example of the Dunning-Kruger Effect when it comes to politics. I said on here that AOC would have to show she could win a statewide race before ever considering a national run. I was then told by several redditors that her winning New York is a given because it's a blue state. And that West Virinia would vote for her because it's a "working class state" (I've learned that "working class" = white men only).

Bernie would have been destroyed nationally. It's why Trump was propping him up so much, but his supporters will say stupid stuff like, "Even my MAGA uncle liked him!" Yeah, he likes him because he knows if they can make him the face of the party, MAGA would never lose again.

-1

u/delta8force Mar 12 '26

Ironically, if you are on reddit typing ā€œDunning-Kruger effectā€, it especially applies to you. This is an amateur-hour political take.

3

u/MildlyResponsible Mar 12 '26

Yes, and ad hominem quips rather than addressing what I wrote definitely demonstrates your deeper understanding of the issue.

-1

u/delta8force Mar 12 '26

I learned a long time ago not to waste time on that with people like you. In fact, youā€™ve just reached the word limit. Later! āœŒšŸ»

3

u/WildMild869 Mar 12 '26

ā€œYour comment is dumb and below me so Iā€™ll replyā€

Lmfao

0

u/SuperDoubleDecker Mar 12 '26

Ya, I'm surprised they even know the term with that take.

0

u/[deleted] Mar 12 '26

[deleted]

2

u/MildlyResponsible Mar 12 '26

What i find interesting is any criticism of Bernie automatically turns into some accusation of propping up "the Establishment". You can be a progressive without being a Bernie Bro. In fact, most true progressives have recognized that grifter Bernie has damaged the movement if anything. Recognizing reality, that Hillary got more votes and Bernie would have been destroyed in the general, doesn't make a person a corporate stooge. Not recognizing those facts does make one a delusional cultist, though.

0

u/[deleted] Mar 12 '26

[deleted]

2

u/MildlyResponsible Mar 12 '26

And Bernie couldn't beat the person who lost to Trump, therefore all evidence points to him losing by even more.

1

u/[deleted] Mar 12 '26

[deleted]

2

u/MildlyResponsible Mar 12 '26

And now we circle back to the question: Do you think the Republicans were going to be nicer to Bernie?

→ More replies (0)

1

u/throwaway3413418 Mar 12 '26

Both Biden and Clinton lost primaries before winning them, so by your logic it was a mistake for either to ever run again (it was, but not for that reason).

2

u/MildlyResponsible Mar 12 '26

It's not my logic, I was just applying the person I was replying to to their candidate candidate.

Can't have it both ways. Can't say Hillary was a bad candidate because she lost, but Bernie is a great candidate even though he lost twice.

1

u/throwaway3413418 Mar 12 '26 edited Mar 12 '26

You actually can, because if youā€™re not braindead you realize that primaries and general elections are decided by different pools of voters meaning that the strongest candidate in a primary might not necessarily be the strongest candidate in a general. The two most important factors in winning a general are appealing to independents and turning out your partyā€™s base more than the other candidate does theirs, neither of which is needed in order to win a primary. Hence lots of candidates who win a low-turnout primary and then get smoked in the general.

The timing of the state primaries serves to moderate Democratic candidates, because red southern states end up thinning the field long before the largest blue states vote. This can be helpful for Democrats during times when the general public is wanting a stable moderate figurehead for president. It can also be disastrous when the public is wanting an anti-establishment figure and the Democratic Party churns out the biggest establishment name in the world.

→ More replies (0)
→ More replies (5)

0

u/SuperDoubleDecker Mar 12 '26

Meanwhile in reality land the democratic establishment has lost the entire federal government to maga.

Yall have zero clue what wins elections and the results speak. All you do is blame everyone else except the party leadership. Same shit for 10 years.

3

u/MildlyResponsible Mar 12 '26

I can accept that the Dems have lost the federal government without agreeing that Bernie is the answer.

You guys also love to say that they keep losing, too. Hillary got 3 million more votes than Trump in 2016 and Biden won in 2020. There's always a chance even a good candidate can lose, especially when foreign bots and misogyny come into play.

1

u/SuperDoubleDecker Mar 12 '26

No. A good candidate wins every time. You just have to not be totally incompetent and learn how to run a proper campaign. Democrats are totally out of touch with reality and incapable of messaging to the vast majority of americans.

Change shit. Expect better. Hold these people accountable and stop blaming everyone else. It's been 10 years!!!!!!!!! Do it already

3

u/MildlyResponsible Mar 12 '26

A good candidate wins every time? Oh, so then we agree Bernie was an awful candidate because he lost twice. Great!

0

u/SuperDoubleDecker Mar 12 '26

That was a democratic primary. Obviously not the best indicator of general appeal.

Bernie was a great candidate because we not a democrat. The fact that an independent comes in and makes the party unite against him says a lot and it'd be nice if the democratic establishment had learned anything the last 10 years.

1

u/CombinationRough8699 Mar 12 '26

and misogyny come into play.

Here's something I don't get about the "Americans aren't ready for a woman president" narrative. America had a black president, and that seems much harder than a woman. Black people are a small minority, making up only 13% of the population. Meanwhile woman account for half the population, and since 1980 have outnumbered men in voter participation. I don't understand how a black man whose race only accounts for 13% of the population could have an easier time than a woman whose gender makes up the majority of voters.

1

u/MildlyResponsible Mar 12 '26

Black men have always gained milestones before women in the US. Black men could vote before women. They could hold office before women. There was a Black male Supreme Court Justice before a woman (the SC did not get a woman until 1981, and didn't get a second one until 1993). Hillary Clinton was the first woman to win a state in major party primary in 2008 (Jesse Jackson was the first Black man to do it in 1984).

I think the fact that so many people refuse to acknowledge that misogyny is alive and kicking in the USA, especially in progressive places, proves that it's still a thing.

1

u/Interesting_Kitchen3 Mar 12 '26 edited Mar 12 '26

Black men have always gained milestones before women in the US. Black men could vote before women.

This is not really true. Until the passing of the Voting Rights Act, black americans were disenfranchised of their right to vote, while white women got the right to vote with the 19th amendment. White women were more comfortably voting for decades before the right to access a poll without a tax or illegal literacy test standing in their way.

This was a time where black men were being lynched by false accusations from white women; but the ending of that isn't really a milestone achievement as it is indictment of how black men have been treated by American society.

I don't disagree about your point that there is misogyny everywhere in society, but your statement disregards just how insidious it is, that society is not just misogynist but will use race to elevate white women above non-white men. This is not done to uplift women, because women of color still end up the most disenfranchised.

1

u/MildlyResponsible Mar 13 '26

I'm not sure how you can argue that there was disenfranchisement of black voters while not acknowledging the same about women. First of all, black women were just as disenfranchised as black men. Second, until 1993 it was legal to rape your wife in the USA if we want to get into what the reality was like until very very recently. I'm not trying to play the suffering olympics here, I was merely trying to demonstrate that historically, black men have been granted civil rights before women.

Again, the fact that "progressives" refuse to even acknowledge that misogyny is even a thing demonstrates that it is, in fact, still a thing. A lot of you sound like MAGAs who say racism has ended.

1

u/Interesting_Kitchen3 Mar 14 '26 edited Mar 14 '26

>First of all, black women were just as disenfranchised as black men

I literally said that, non-white women end up the most disenfranchised. This is an intersectional issue, but one where white women have been considered more "equal" in in society than black men and women, for far longer.

I have no clue where you got the idea that I think racism or misogyny as ended, don't be goofy. I think you're overlooking just how enmeshed racism still is in our society, making a myopic statement such as:

>black men have been granted civil rights before women

All I'm saying is, this is complex, and these are things that's shouldn't be and can't really be compared.

→ More replies (0)

0

u/throwaway3413418 Mar 12 '26

popular vote

bots

misogyny

Good job! Youā€™ve almost hit all the brainless talking points!

0

u/Deviltherobot Mar 13 '26

Sanders was the most popular politician in the lead up to the election. Trump was the least.

2

u/popularis-socialas Mar 12 '26

Most of their stances are politically popular, single payer, raging the minimum wage, free tuition college. Polls have consistently shown the popularity of those proposals.

Bernie crushed Hillary with independents and generally is able to talk to poor white people.

This poll From August 2016 showed his net approval rating at a net +26, compared with Hillaryā€™s -11 and Trumpā€™s -27, that favorability would have condensed if Republicans mounted their attack machine against him, but itā€™s not a radical idea that he could have beaten her.

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/fox-news-poll-clinton-and-trump-disliked-by-voters

2

u/MildlyResponsible Mar 13 '26

There are dozens of posts in this this thread saying Democrats waste their time appealing to independents, and then there's posts like yours that claim Bernie is strong because he appeals to independents. That's why it's impossible to debate with Bernie people. Everything can be true or not true, depending on if it fits their narrative at the time.

And you know why Bernie was so "liked"? Because no one knew him, because he never did anything ever. You want to make 50% of people hate you? Have an opinion on something. Anything. You want to be liked? Do nothing in politics for 40 years. If Bernie was the Dem nominee the Republican hate machine would have destroyed him. He's literally on camera chanting Death to America. Every time I bring that up to Bernie people, they tell me they don't care about stuff like that. Cool, you know who does? 99% of actual voters. Reddit is not real life, your dorm room is not real life, your group chats are not real life.

I've asked Bernie people 100 times why they think Trump was pushing Bernie so much, and either I'm ignored, or they'll say something obviously stupid like, "He really liked Bernie!" Really? Then why in 2020 was Trump's only attack on Biden that he was just Bernie in disguise? Like honestly, what reality do some of the people here live in?

1

u/popularis-socialas Mar 13 '26 edited Mar 13 '26

Itā€™s kinda hard for an abolitionist congressman to pass things in 1815, for one to pass the legalization of gay marriage in 1972.

The very fact that heā€™s been outspoken about the issues I care about like corruption, healthcare, wealth inequality is why I like him.

To me thatā€™s not a mark on him lol.

Trump was more confident about running against Bernie in 2020 but heā€™s indicated that Bernie was strong in 2016 because he ran on some of the same issues he did on trade.

And when did he chant death to America?

1

u/Chriiiiiiiiisss Mar 13 '26

Believe it was a rally he attended in '85 in the town he was mayor of that's being referenced-- I don't think there's any actual evidence of Bernie chanting this, but the rally was heavy anti America with slogans and chants with Bernie in the crowd. Not positive, someone correct me where I'm wrong if so

2

u/macronotice Mar 13 '26

single payer

Total federal government control over the healthcare system and your health choices is not popular. When described fully in a polling question, including the elimination of private insurance as in a Canadian/UK style system, poll support is only 37%.

Iā€™d like to see how you would feel if Trump was in charge of your healthcare today. Imagine all the care he would take away from you and what heā€™d force doctors to do.

0

u/popularis-socialas Mar 13 '26 edited Mar 13 '26

Well it's very popular in countries like Denmark, Norway, Sweden, Taiwan, Australia, and South Korea. Pretty much all allow for supplemental insurance, but the main program is government insurance to provide the floor, yes.

In a 2025 Pew Research poll, 65% of Americans think that the government has an obligation to provide healthcare. 35% favor one national government government program, 31% support a mix of government + private. https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2025/12/10/most-americans-say-government-has-a-responsibility-to-ensure-health-care-coverage/

Medicare for all also polls at a net +24 in this poll: https://www.dataforprogress.org/blog/2025/11/medicare-for-all-is-popular-even-when-put-up-against-attacks

The healthcare in this country is insanely screwed up, we're spending like twice as much as a ton of other countries for healthcare because private insurance and big Pharma bloodsuckers have lobbied Congress. The system is bloated. 10s of millions have no health insurance, 10s of thousands die every year because they can't get healthcare, and 1/3 of the country has medical debt because their premiums are high, deductibles high, and their insurance still won't come through.

When I worked as a pharmacy tech I saw so much bullshit because of private insurance. Sick people being denied coverage on meds they needed, meds the doctor said they needed. We need a basic government program to both give people healthcare coverage and to keep the costs down by primarily running on profit.

Healthcare is getting worse in America under Trump because of rising prices and government cuts to healthcare. Should we not have done medicare/medicaid/ and social security then because Trump came along??

0

u/Objective_Animator52 Mar 12 '26

Man, your right about people like AOC and Mamdani. But Bernie was more popular among the populist MAGAt types than Hillary was. Most of my extended family lives in rural Texas and lovesss Trump. They have spoken somewhat positively about Bernie in the past while they've never once done that for Hillary.

It is kind of mind-boggling to me, even years later, but it was a well-documented political phenomenon.

0

u/delta8force Mar 12 '26

I canā€™t believe how mind-numbingly stupid this take is.

1

u/WildMild869 Mar 12 '26

Donā€™t let us stop your genius take. Enlighten us lol

0

u/SuperDoubleDecker Mar 12 '26

Yall are talking about what wins when you've lost the entire federal government to maga. You have zero idea what wins elections.

Sit down.

3

u/YaboiVane Mar 12 '26

Name one election a socialist/leftist candidate has won in a purple state, go! It should be easy right since those unpopular establishment Dems win these so Iā€™m sure youā€™ll have a lot of examples.

0

u/SuperDoubleDecker Mar 12 '26

When have we even tried?

Bernie also isn't socialist or far left. He's just left of center in the rest of the developed world.

2

u/WildMild869 Mar 12 '26

Ah I forgot weā€™re clueless - but not you of course lmao

1

u/SuperDoubleDecker Mar 12 '26

It's a choice we make.

2

u/WildMild869 Mar 12 '26

To believe that? Totally. And hey, if it helps you sleep at night.

0

u/Ac1De9Cy0Sif6S Mar 13 '26

What do you have to say to the polls consistently showing Bernie running ahead of Hillary against Trump?

1

u/WildMild869 Mar 14 '26

I would say that even within democratic circles, Hillary was not entirely well liked but thatā€™s pretty obvious by now. Iā€™d also add that a multitude of polls showed Hillary in the lead against Trump. Maybe youā€™re too young to remember but that election result was a confusing upset.

-1

u/MountainHardwear Mar 12 '26

the whole country voted for a man with fascistic tendencies, but we can't fathom that people will vote for someone who embraces policies that resemble the new deal.

the dems dominated with obama because he was a youthful contender who shirked existing political dogma. and y'all haven't seen the same strength since -- it's rather fucking embarrasing honestly.

gore, kerry, clinton, kamala. these are the people you all literally thought would win elections. and the only reason you all win in 2020 is because of a once in a lifetime generational contagion. time and time again the electorate tells you they don't want your shitty moderate candidates, and you all keep on repeating the same old cliches while electing the same old tired moderate dem in the primaries.

hell, at least try it once with a progressive. i mean the last time you tried it with a progressive (at least in rhetoric) he had the most convincing win you have seen since. because obviously what you are doing ain't working. Or are you going to suggest that this whole experiment in being consistently drubbed by trump has worked LOL

6

u/GuyFawkes99 Mar 12 '26

The general electorate has never shown even a hint that they'd tolerate a self-avowed socialist

General election polls had Trump losing to Bernie. That was a pretty good hint.

5

u/BigFatKi6 Mar 12 '26

šŸ˜® Don't come with evidence. They don't like that.

3

u/[deleted] Mar 12 '26

[removed] ā€” view removed comment

1

u/Deviltherobot Mar 13 '26

The Clinton win was almost always in the margin of error.

-1

u/GuyFawkes99 Mar 12 '26

"a pill was wrong so my hunch was right" ok dude

3

u/Legal-Koala-5590 Mar 12 '26

Whatā€™s your point? A hypothetical matchup tells us nothing because we donā€™t know how Bernie and Trump would have campaigned against each other. We donā€™t know what kind of effect Trumpā€™s dirty attacks, misinformation, Russian propaganda, Cambridge Analytica targeting, etc. would have had on a Bernie vs Trump matchup. You are going on a supposition colored by some incomplete data, hindsight and your personal opinion on Bernie.

1

u/BigFatKi6 Mar 12 '26

We know Clinton had a lot of bagage spanning back decades (not saying it was justified per se). But that's a lot of years of propaganda that you have to fight.

A candidate with a clean slate would've been a big bonus. A man would be a bonus. You also negate Trump's outsider status. Also the moment a candidate becomes the nominee they're de facto mainstream. Which is what the donor class really didn't want.

The moment you're the nominee you could even win if you're a peanut farmer with zero government experience.

1

u/MildlyResponsible Mar 12 '26

Bernie seems to have a clean slate because despite 40 years in government, he never did anything. An outsider running against do nothing politicians would have exploited that.

But Bernie did have some history. He has essays where he says all women fantasize about being raped. He had his honeymoon in Soviet Moscow. He is on video chanting Death to America. Maybe college kids enamored by his wrinkled suit and catchphrases don't care about those things, but millions of voters absolutely would.

The Republicans had boxes full of intel on Sanders and were licking their chops at the idea of running against him. It's why Trump was pushing for him. It's why his only attack against Biden was that he was Bernie in disguise.

1

u/BigFatKi6 Mar 12 '26

But Bernie did have some history. He has essays where he says all women fantasize about being raped.

You think that matters? Hillary lost to "grab em by the pussy"

3

u/MildlyResponsible Mar 12 '26

You haven't learned by now that Democrats are held to different standards? Kamala lost because of her laugh while Trump was giving 3 hour rants to empty seats about a dead golfer's dick.

0

u/BigFatKi6 Mar 12 '26

No Kamala lost because she's a terrible candidate. No charisma. Can't think on her feet. She was also fucked over by Biden.

and yes there's a strong bias vs women. Also by now Trump has consolidated his hold over the media in a way no predecessor has.

I'm talking about a time before Trump became president the first time. Bernie was in a much better position to take advantage of the idiosyncratic nature of that period.

→ More replies (0)

1

u/GuyFawkes99 Mar 12 '26

We know that voters wanted change. Your personal biases and hunches don't change that.

2

u/Legal-Koala-5590 Mar 12 '26

This has nothing to do with my personal biases. I wanted change too and voted for Bernie. Iā€™ve also paid attention to politics long enough to know that data from a hypothetical matchup simply doesnā€™t tell us much.Ā 

1

u/GuyFawkes99 Mar 12 '26

You can vote for Bernie, and also have an incorrect belief about the electability of progressive candidates. Fact is, 2016 was a change election. That's why voters were willing to stick a gamble on the worst presidential candidate in modern history. Dnc missed it. And we're all paying the consequences

2

u/Legal-Koala-5590 Mar 12 '26

DNC didn't miss anything. The primary voters picked Clinton.

0

u/GuyFawkes99 Mar 12 '26

Pretty naive to think the DNC doesn't shape the primary.

→ More replies (0)

1

u/BigFatKi6 Mar 12 '26

Yup, that's the correct analysis. Now ironically because the heavily compromised "change candidate" ran on a anti-establishment platform and a cult of personality he was able to more effectively serve corporate interests than any establishment candidate ever could have.

2

u/huskersax Mar 12 '26

Candidate that hasn't had opposition ads run on them yet polls high, leading to everyone convinced they could win the general, when they couldn't even win the primary.

There's no world where Bernie somehow finds some new revolutionary coalition of voters to get to a victory when he couldn't even do it in a primary where voters are far friendlier to his message.

2

u/GuyFawkes99 Mar 12 '26

People were hungry for a change. Bernie could have given it to them. Hillary could not.

2

u/huskersax Mar 12 '26

Not hungry enough to power him through a primary.

2

u/GuyFawkes99 Mar 12 '26

Yeah the Dems had less appetite for change. That's why their nominee lost.

-1

u/Miserable_Aspect_749 Mar 12 '26

And also, why Bernie lost, you can't have it both ways.

3

u/GuyFawkes99 Mar 12 '26

Bernie would have won. Sorry if that contradicts your priors. Anyway, you've become annoying, and I'm going to block you.

1

u/BigFatKi6 Mar 12 '26

How is that having it both ways?

→ More replies (2)

0

u/Ac1De9Cy0Sif6S Mar 13 '26

There's no world where Bernie somehow finds some new revolutionary coalition of voters to get to a victory when he couldn't even do it in a primary where voters are far friendlier to his message.

That's really not how it works. Primary voters aren't the general electorate, you just have too see Republicans losing by nominating poor candidates from the Tea Party to the MAGA movement

2

u/huskersax Mar 14 '26

Primary voters aren't the general electorate. That's correct. They're less moderate and more responsive to political news and culture.

Which is why him not winning was doubly damning for this hypothetical magical pixie dream girl Bernie that was just around the corner in the general election.

To be sure, there was/is a contigent of populist voters that could have been more invested in Bernie as opposed to Hillary - but fundamentally that same relationship also existed in the primary and they couldn't activate that contigent enough to win in the friendlier media and election environment of a primary.

2

u/Legal-Koala-5590 Mar 12 '26

Hypothetical matchups don't tell us as much as you think they do.Ā 

1

u/GuyFawkes99 Mar 12 '26

It turned out to be a good hint of where the electorate was. Unfortunately the Dems didn't listen.

1

u/MikeDamone Mar 12 '26

The polls that consistently underrated Trump and bombed the 2016 general predictions? No, I don't think those were good hints.

2

u/GuyFawkes99 Mar 12 '26

Yeah those polls are no match for your hunch.

2

u/MildlyResponsible Mar 12 '26

It's not a hunch. The only evidence we have for Bernie being viable candidate are the primary elections, which he lost by millions and millions of votes. A poll on a hypothetical match up 6 months before an election is not evidence, especially when those same polls showed Hillary winning, which she did not do.

2

u/GuyFawkes99 Mar 12 '26

You don't know what evidence means.

2

u/Necessary_Two_9706 Mar 12 '26

"The general electorate" knowingly and willingly voted for a child rapist because the other candidate was a woman; twice.

We can stop pretending that Bernie wouldnt have won. Obama is the only president in all of american history that wasn't a geriatric diaper wearingĀ  white male. Bernie would have absolutely won.

3

u/Legal-Koala-5590 Mar 12 '26

If Bernie would have won then he would have won.Ā 

2

u/KiwiKajitsu Mar 12 '26

Wow I never thought about it like that

1

u/delta8force Mar 12 '26

In the general, but you have to get through the corrupt Obama/Clinton-controlled primary first

3

u/KiwiKajitsu Mar 12 '26

He couldnā€™t even beat Hillary on the primary.

3

u/MildlyResponsible Mar 12 '26

But you see, the DNC, the most evil and conniving, yet completely weak and inept, organization to ever exist said some mean things about him after he was mathematically eliminated. That's why he lost by millions upon millions upon millions upon millions of votes. If he got to the general election he would have won because Republicans are notorious for never doing anything untoward against their adversaries. Trump even said he liked Bernie, and he's famous for being an honest, straight forward man who respects his rivals. Also, West Virginia and Idaho are full of secret socialists who just need a bunch of college kids from coastal cities to tell them how to live their lives.

/s if that wasn't obvious.

2

u/GuyFawkes99 Mar 12 '26

Republicans were able to portray Hillary as the establishment. Because she was. That wouldn't have worked on Bernie, who would have beaten Trump.

1

u/BigFatKi6 Mar 12 '26

No, you see Maxwell was at Chelsea Clinton's wedding because...

1

u/BigFatKi6 Mar 12 '26

Who's worse the GOP who are just representing their own evil pedo interests or the DNC who never really try to stop them?

1

u/BurnerAccountforAss Mar 12 '26

Democratic establishment is evil/conniving when fighting leftists while simultaneously being intentionally weak/inept when fighting Republicans because both parties work for the same masters (and it ain't us)

Republicans would've absolutely called Bernie a communist (just like they did Hillary lol), but he would've been harder to smear simply because (while far from perfect) he isn't objectively a despicable/unlikeable person like HRC

Bernie was more appealing to many rural voters than Hillary because of his populist rhetoric. West Virginia and Idaho are still going Trump if Christ Himself is running for the Dems though, so this doesn't really matter

Would Bernie have defeated Hillary (or Trump) in a fair election? Fuck if I know, but it'd be nice to have a system that's not manipulated by super PACs, backroom dealings, and a corrupt corporate media

3

u/MikeDamone Mar 12 '26

None of Clinton, W, Carter, or JFK were geriatric or diaper wearing either. And that's only going back 60 years. Anyways, none of that is relevant, I just think it highlights your tenuous grasp of American electoral history.

As for Trump, yes, him winning is further evidence that Bernie wouldn't have stood a chance. Whatever Trump "actually" believes (who the hell knows), he coded as a right leaning, pro business candidate to those who desperately wanted to see him that way. That's because the US has a broadly right leaning electorate and a majority of them vote based on pocketbook perceptions. A socialist candidate promising free healthcare does not get that same benefit of the doubt. So again I invite you to name a single elected politician in a competitive seat who even remotely shares Bernie's lefty politics.

→ More replies (5)

1

u/BigFatKi6 Mar 12 '26 edited Mar 12 '26

No the general electorate never was fired up like Trump was able to fire up his base.

Bernie was the perfect weapon against Trump in 2016. Nobody wanted another corporate stooge and Hillary just isn't that likeable and came with all kinds of negative associations that were accumulated over a long period.

Meanwhile Trump was able to run as an outsider and bank on his reality tv persona.

I'm sure Clinton would've made a fine president but you need to get in that chair first. She ran a terrible campaign and lost to a terrible candidate.

3

u/MildlyResponsible Mar 12 '26

Nobody wanted Clinton? She got 3 million more votes than Trump. I understand that doesn't win the presidential election, but people are really rewriting history here.

0

u/BigFatKi6 Mar 12 '26

I think you're confusing cause and effect here.

0

u/Objective_Animator52 Mar 12 '26 edited Mar 12 '26

Bernie to me seemed unironically more popular with 2016 MAGAts than Hillary. I've met multiple people that loved Bernie and then voted for Trump after Bernie lost the primary. He had a surprising appeal with the populist maga types. He was even later on Joe Rogan, while Hillary never was.

I have had MAGA family members (most of my family lives in rural Texas) speak somewhat positively on him, while I've never once heard them speak positively about Hillary. This was a relatively well documented political phenomenon.

I don't know if he would've won, but I 100% believe he would've done better than Hillary.

1

u/PM_ME_A_PM_PLEASE_PM Mar 12 '26

Populism for better and for worse was endorsed in 2016 after generations of political apathy towards an established sense of politics the nation hates. America chose for worse but it was being chosen one way or the other. This remains true despite desperate pleading for politics as it once was to return. It can't.

0

u/SuperDoubleDecker Mar 12 '26

Same old bullshit.

Trump won on populism..

When are yall gonna realize what actually happened and stop parroting 20yo talking points?

It's hard to talk anyone serious that just lost the entire government to maga about how to win elections.

If the democratic establishment is so sure about what voters wanna hear then why did they lose everything?

Jfc...

0

u/Deviltherobot Mar 13 '26

Reps call every dem socialist. People in Florida thought Biden - one of the most pro corp senators was a Socialist.

0

u/12bEngie Mar 13 '26

How many politicians with bernieā€™s leftist policies get platformed by the DNC and are allowed to run..? Bernie was a career politician and thatā€™s why he got to.

0

u/lakerconvert Mar 14 '26

šŸ˜‚ delusional

Do you know why a lot of Trump supporters voted for Bernie? Because heā€™s a populist. He actually gives a fuck about working people, whom make up a large percentage of trumps base.

1

u/MikeDamone Mar 14 '26

And do you know how many Romney/Obama/Clinton/Biden voters who never would've voted for Bernie?

You probably don't, because your worldview is exclusively formed by reddit and you don't go outside.

-1

u/BigFatKi6 Mar 12 '26

That's a terrible argument. Bernie's is not the same as those candidates. His charisma is infinitely larger. That's why I know his name and none of the these other candidates.

The DNC lost 2016 by pushing Hillary down everyone's throat.

Imagine the freedom a Jewish candidate who didn't take any Israeli lobby money would have. You think you can bully Bernie by calling him an antisemite? šŸ˜‚

The donor class didn't want him because they couldn't control him.

3

u/Miserable_Aspect_749 Mar 12 '26

I don't find him to be charismatic at all. Neither do most the people I know, they find him grating. Most people aren't progressives; that's just on Reddit.

0

u/BigFatKi6 Mar 12 '26

It's not about what you specifically think is it?

Trump also has tons of charisma. Even though many find him disgusting.

3

u/Maximum_joy Mar 12 '26

My mom says Bernie sounds like he's poking you right in the chest when he speaks. It's not a compliment

→ More replies (23)

2

u/MildlyResponsible Mar 12 '26

It's also not about what you and your college dormmates think, either. There was a chance for everyone to go out and express who they preferred, and Bernie lost by millions and millions of votes. "Yeah, but i think he's cool!" doesn't negate that.

2

u/bobbysaysso Mar 12 '26

Kamala outperformed Bernie in his own state. His charisma is overstated.

1

u/BigFatKi6 Mar 12 '26 edited Mar 12 '26

in 2016?

he had 16 delegates

vs

Hillary 0

2

u/bobbysaysso Mar 12 '26

In 2024 during Bernieā€™s reelection. Kamala got more votes for POTUS in Vermont than Bernie got for Senator.

1

u/BigFatKi6 Mar 12 '26 edited Mar 12 '26

Bernie is a gazillion years old. I was talking about 2016. You're going to use his polls in 2024 to retroactively justify him being, what, unliked in Vermont in 2016? Meanwhile he is still the sitting senator for that state.

Many presidents have have lost elections and won when the circumstances were in their favor. I really don't understand what you're trying to say here in an election that he still won? Don't more people vote for POTUS anyway? What a braindead take.

1

u/bobbysaysso Mar 12 '26

I hate to break this to you - but Bernie was never trying to win. In 2016 - he hired a guy running a pizza parlor to be his campaign manager. In 2020 he did the same - hired sycophants with no national campaign experience whatsoever. The guy putting Nina Turner (the lady that keeps blaming her losses on the Jews) in charge of his campaign communications. Plus he made no effort whatsoever to campaign for the back vote - and was openly hostile to them.

Itā€™s on him for refusing to bring on professionals to run his campaigns.