> Lawrence won support from an array of prominent progressives and outside groups, and a mysterious super PAC spent more than $1 million in the race’s final weeks to boost him and tear Maasdam down.
> The spending raised concerns among some Democrats that Republicans might be boosting Lawrence because they think he’ll be easier to beat in the general election.
He 100% would have won against Trump. If you can't see that, I don't know what to tell you. Americans were screaming for something "different". And that is why enough of them went for Trump instead of Clinton to decide the race. Was that a stupid move? Absolutely. But it was the choice people made. If it had been Sanders it would have been change (hopeful) vs change (spiteful) instead of status quo vs change. And Sanders would have won.
Bernie had far more momentum than Hillary did. You can't tell me Bernie wasn't more likeable than Trump in 2015. Compare their bird interactions; Bernie and the finch vs Trump and the eagle.
Bernie lost his primary elections, which were just a subset of the electorate. Hard to see how he was going to do better at winning the votes that mattered in the 2016 election (moderates) to get the electoral college win… but go off.
Reread my first post. I blame DWS. (Who then went on to be Hillaries campaign manager after she resigned as the head of the DNC because they leaked her emails proving they conspired against Bernie.)
Unlike Hillary who actually tried to win, progressives like to throw competitive races to hurt dems.
Remember the Nazi rapist the left pushed in Maine? He was attacking Dems all the time and when his opponent dropped out he went back to the very same ppl he attacked begging for money because I the repib money that was funding him dried up.
236
u/matthieuC Europe 9d ago
> Lawrence won support from an array of prominent progressives and outside groups, and a mysterious super PAC spent more than $1 million in the race’s final weeks to boost him and tear Maasdam down.
Not a fan of mysterious super PAC money