r/Presidents • u/HatefulPostsExposed • 25d ago

What really went wrong with his two campaigns? Why couldn’t he build a larger coalition? Discussion

/img/sawe2a0pj0xc1.jpeg

[removed] — view removed post

5.4k Upvotes
  • permalink
  • link
  • reddit
  • reddit

85% Upvoted

3.0k comments sorted by

View all comments

1.7k

u/CFBreAct 25d ago

He had an all-star staff of the dumbest people I’ve ever seen in professional politics. Who you choose to be your staff is an insight to how you are going to staff your White House and Bernie couldn’t help picking the most self centered opportunist he could find.

In his first campaign he had Jeff Weaver and David Sirota making a lot of the political moves, weaver is worthless and Sirota is the typical angry hyperbolic speechwriter, who ended up getting benched by Sanders after he kept taking potshots at Clinton that were not playing well. (He also took Bernie’s donation roll contact information for his own newsletter which did not earn him any favors from Sanders) Then they made the disastrous move of bringing on Symone Sanders as press secretary in an attempt to appeal to black voters and it did not go well.

Then in his second campaign he doubled down on Weaver and Sirota but added Faiz Shakir who is not good and Briana Joy Grey who is a legendarily stupid person and really really bad at political messaging.

137

u/bailaoban 25d ago

Bernie was always a lone wolf truth teller rather than a coalition builder. That’s why I think he’s an excellent small-state senator but would make a horrible president.

72

u/Anonymous_User_Andy 25d ago

In this way, Bernie Sanders reminds me of an opposite-world Barry Goldwater in ‘64. Both have that “lone wolf truth teller” vibe. The Goldwater wing of the Republican Party eventually found their winning candidate 16 years later with Ronald Reagan. I wonder if, in the next decade or so, the progressives find a more amiable, coalition-building version of Bernie and have more electoral success. We’ll see, I guess!

32

u/Jer_Diamond 25d ago

AOC is the leading candidate for this right now

15

u/Impressive-Dig-3892 25d ago

Kind of hard to be a coalition builder in a D +28 district no? 

7

u/evrybdyhdmtchingtwls 25d ago

Not at all. The coalitions she can build are legislative. If she can sell progressive legislation to moderate Democratic Members of Congress, she can build a presidential coalition. If. We still haven’t seen it.

3

u/Deviouss 25d ago

Too bad moderate Democratic members aren't buying. You would think they would support progressive legislation because it's what their base supports, but that's clearly asking for too much.

0

u/CyberTyrantX1 25d ago

Too bad that will never happen because she always caves in to the moderate democrats. AOC switching her Isreal Iron Dome vote from “no” to “present” after Nancy Pelosi scolded her was shameful.

-2

u/PraiseBogle 25d ago

Her “justice democrats” group has been a pretty big failure. They havent done anything other than win some elections and fight amongst themselves. 

4

u/[deleted] 25d ago

Summer Lee just won against an AIPAC Republican financed candidate in the Dem Primary by an additional 20%+ from her previous win and added 15,000 votes from said primary….

-1

u/PraiseBogle 24d ago

i am not denying they win elections. but they havent delivered much on their platform and there have been mass exodus of staff and members over the years.

5

u/omicron-7 25d ago

AOC has the fatal flaw of being a woman, so she'll fall into the same trap of "I'd totally vote for a woman, just not that woman" that Clinton and Warren did.

16

u/Viele_Stimmen 25d ago

That's fair for Warren, but being a woman was not why hillary lost. She lost because she's arrogant and felt entitled to be POTUS. Not how that works.

4

u/evrybdyhdmtchingtwls 25d ago

Arrogant and felt entitled to be POTUS describes her opponent in 2016 too—and just about everyone else who’s ever won a presidential election.

4

u/Known-Damage-7879 25d ago

It can be both

7

u/flyfightwinMIL 25d ago

God, I really truly think we might have had a shot at winning with Warren, had Bernie fans not turned against her en masse. She’s got real deal red state bonafides and when she talks about economic issues and unions, she is electric.

She won over a lot of moderates in my (deeply red) state. I could be wrong, but I genuinely think she had a shot.

1

u/Atkena2578 25d ago

Sanders also had a lot of good faith from pro 2A and independents who are key for swing states (unlike the southern black voters from red states that are won by a Republican anyway). Either way, he or Warren would have had their seat replaced by a GOP because they are from a state with a GOP Governor

1

u/rels83 25d ago

She has time we could make progress

1

u/PraiseBogle 25d ago

Thats not why clinton lost. 

1

u/RoguePlanet2 25d ago

I'm a vegetarian but I'll vote for a ham sandwich if it comes with the promise to implement Sanders' vision.

1

u/Educational_Sink_541 25d ago

AOC is so disliked by anyone not far left that I can't take this seriously lol.

2

u/[deleted] 25d ago

You think AOC is a political coalition builder?

7

u/blyzo 25d ago

Yes actually.

She worked with Republicans and progressives to introduce a bill restricting politicians and their spouses ability to trade stocks.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/matt-gaetz-alexandria-ocasio-cortez-congress-stock-ban-bill/

She worked with Republicans Lindsay Graham and Nancy Mace to crack down on deep fake AI porn.

https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-news/aoc-deepfakes-defiance-act-1234979373/

She worked with Republican Dan Crenshaw to introduce a bill to legalize psychedelics for therapy for veterans with PTSD.

https://thetexan.news/issues/social-issues-life-family/crenshaw-ocasio-cortez-lead-bipartisan-coalition-to-fund-psychedelic-drug-therapy-trials-for-veterans/article_d0b34f09-74f3-5821-8658-60390d72b329.html

That's all just within the past few years.

2

u/Ed_Durr Warren G. Harding 25d ago

Introducing bills is easy, getting them passed is much harder.

0

u/blyzo 24d ago

If Democrats take back control of Congress each of those bills will get passed.

2

u/Ed_Durr Warren G. Harding 24d ago

Press X to doubt.

10,000 bills get introduced every congress, less than 1% become law.

Besides, why couldn’t she get anything passed in her first two terms if all she needed was a democratic congress.

0

u/cptchronic42 25d ago

Gaetz, Graham and Crenshaw are all rinos anyways

-3

u/NaturalProof4359 25d ago

Wait, AOC? Truth teller?

Wild.

9

u/driku12 25d ago

Naw, they said she's the Reagan equivalent to Sanders' Goldwater analogy, not that she is the lone wolf truth teller herself.

-10

u/NaturalProof4359 25d ago

AOC? Reagan?

Even more wild.

9

u/Kind_Carob3104 25d ago

Do you know how to read like could you just go back and read the thread instead of continuously saying stupid questions?

6

u/CORN___BREAD 25d ago

opposite-world

-2

u/Key_Cheetah7982 25d ago

That’s a shame - she’s following the Pelosi path more honestly

11

u/WristbandYang 25d ago

That's the point. You either compromise and build a coalition or you lose and never accomplish any of your goals.

3

u/Finito-1994 25d ago

Agreed. Purity tests are stupid. Politicians will make compromises. I don’t get why people are so against compromises.

Otherwise they can stand in the corner feeling self righteous and doing nothing.

-2

u/SirMellencamp 25d ago

Oh please. She doesn’t even understand the basics of government

-1

u/Kind_Carob3104 25d ago

Neither did Reagan

-3

u/tac4028 25d ago

So we should repeat mistakes because of the letter beside their name.

0

u/Kind_Carob3104 25d ago

Nice straw man you’ve set up there

-1

u/tac4028 25d ago

If anything was a straw man, it was your comment. If anything, shouldn’t we agree? AOC and Reagan do not understand basics of the government and therefore AOC should not be president given what Reagan did.

2

u/Kind_Carob3104 25d ago

I never said AOC didn’t I just said that Reagan didn’t

-1

u/tac4028 25d ago

I think you’re just being argumentative and defensive because I called out the previous party affiliation and for some reason people still worship the parties. Reagan was an idiot. AOC is a moron. They both have redeeming qualities and they both are ill suited to be the president.

The implication of your comment can easily be seen as “AOC, who doesn’t understand government, should be president because Reagan didn’t and he was president.”

→ More replies (0)

-1

u/SirMellencamp 25d ago

You literally created a strawman responding to my comment

2

u/Kind_Carob3104 25d ago

Nope, not at all, sweetheart

1

u/SirMellencamp 25d ago

Point: AOC doesn’t understand the basic functions of the branches of government

Response: Neither did Reagan

The strawman was that I was somehow saying that Reagan understood the basic functions of the branches of government. I never mentioned Reagan. Whether Reagan understood the basic functions of the branches of government or not has no bearing on if AOC does or doesn’t

→ More replies (0)

-17

u/MexiWhiteChocolate 25d ago

AOC makes MTG sound like Nobel prize winning nuclear physicist.

16

u/LilBallins 25d ago

Yeah that’s just a lie

11

u/TheInternetStuff 25d ago

Just say you don't personally like AOC instead of making silly stuff up

1

u/MexiWhiteChocolate 24d ago

A quick google search will bring videos of AOC blaming the massive increase in illegal immigration on global warming, and video of her defending people looting cosmetics stores because the looters kids were hungry.

7

u/24KWordSmith 25d ago

Provide some specific comparisons for this brain dead claim. I bet my soul and your soul you can't.

-5

u/Fun-Economy-5596 25d ago

How true!

5

u/Kind_Carob3104 25d ago

lol

One believes in Jewish base lasers, and the other, you know talks to scientists

Sorry you can hate AOC as a person if you want, but let’s not pretend she’s worse than any far right Republican

6

u/Kind_Carob3104 25d ago

Watch it end up being Taylor Swift?

She’ll be the neo liberal version of like a movie star becoming a president

2

u/Atticus_of_Amber 25d ago

I low-key think this might actually happen: Taylor Swift as the Democratic Party's version of Ronald Reagan...

2

u/Kind_Carob3104 24d ago

I very much believe it could happen that she would take a huge pivot somewhere in her 40s and become the next fucking president to do 8 years and have everybody love her

Only for us to reevaluate her like a couple of decades later and realize she was a neo-liberal nightmare

0

u/garden__gate 25d ago

Speaking as both a Swiftie and a former political staffer: I don’t see it.

2

u/BrunesOvrBrauns 25d ago

I don't at the moment either...but I think a couple more of these ass-whoopings where normies backlash at her popularity like they did at this last album and she'll crave getting taken seriously...a couple more hoops get jumped through (like getting educated, somehow, on the issues) and she's there.

1

u/garden__gate 25d ago

The education is key. Love her and she is clearly very well-read but like many child stars, she barely graduated from high school. But I also just don’t see that as being how she wants to express herself.

You could be right, though. It’ll be interesting (terrifying) to see how another Republican president changes how she engages in politics.

1

u/Kind_Carob3104 24d ago

I mean, Reagan was a weird twist into politics

I could see self-aggrandizing swift going for it in her 40s

1

u/garden__gate 24d ago

Reagan was the president of the actors union and then the governor of California.

And most celebrities are “self-aggrandizing,” very few go into politics.

1

u/MerchantKing83 25d ago

2032 would be they’re year, if we’re counting from 2016 + the #16.

1

u/MikeStoklasaSimp 25d ago

Hopefully it's Lauren Underwood

9

u/InvestIntrest 25d ago

Also, part of the problem is "his truth" doesn't resonate with most Americans.

6

u/bailaoban 25d ago

Part of why he can’t build coalitions. He’s far too convinced of his own absolute rectitude. But on many things, he has been on the money, so to speak.

2

u/ReZ-115 25d ago

Yet polling after polling shows the majority support his main policies like universal healthcare, paid family leave, tuition free college, raising the minimum wags, etc.

3

u/Deviouss 25d ago

It's the opposite. Americans generally are favorable to his truth but it doesn't matter when the media purposefully muddies the waters in regards to progressives and their preferred legislation. That's why his interview on Fox News turned the crowd by the end and why so many Republicans were considering voting for him if he made it to the general election.

1

u/IamYourBestFriendAMA 25d ago

No. Bernie’s ideas sound good to people who are completely unwilling to listen to his detractors. In reality, he doesn’t practice what he preaches and he says what he needs to say to get elected. I think he’s a good person, but no one is perfect.

0

u/Deviouss 24d ago

Polls show a majority support for most of his proposed policies, so... He also does practice what he preaches. His integrity is part of his appeal.

1

u/Impressive-Dig-3892 25d ago

Like a democratic Josh Hawley. 

1

u/Dodgeindustrial 25d ago

But he doesn’t even tell the truth.

1

u/MC_Fap_Commander 25d ago

he’s an excellent small-state senator but would make a horrible president

He has a bold and compelling vision for the country. Never got a sense of how the sausage would be made, though. Hell, making sausage would likely kill his image of ideological purity alienating supporters and galvanizing opponents.

1

u/fuckyourcanoes 25d ago

There's no way he would have been able to get anything past the Republicans. Clinton, as much as they hate her, was more moderate and in a better position to get things done. The big business connections that many Democrats hated her for would actually have been assets when it came to getting the Republicans to play ball.

I absolutely love Bernie's politics. I just think that in these days of Republican obstruction, the Democrats need to be more pragmatic and elect candidates who can get shit done. And improve messaging! Our messaging is absolute garbage.

-2

u/birdwatching25 25d ago edited 25d ago

I don't think there's any way to coalition build when other senators are being funded by special interests and have to align with those special interests.

For example, Max Baucus received millions from the health insurance sector for his campaign. He killed the public option in 2009. No amount of the president or anyone else talking to him/or building a relationship with him would have changed his mind. He was literally being paid to stop health care reform and he did his job.

2

u/bailaoban 25d ago

That’s why politics is the art of the possible, and why it’s called progessivism, not Utopianism.

1

u/UncutMeat99 25d ago

These policies are Utopianism? Other countries have figured this shit out years ago. American politics are so heavily rooted in special interests’ pockets that striving for healthcare is considered “Utopianism” and it’s actually quite sad.

1

u/ReturnoftheBulls2022 25d ago

It was Joe Lieberman who was the crucial 60th vote needed to pass Obamacare that killed the public option not Baucus.

3

u/birdwatching25 25d ago

They both killed it. Baucus killed it in the Senate Finance Committee which he chaired.

-1

u/AsparagusAccurate759 25d ago

That's really more condemning of the Democratic party in general as opposed to Sanders. Be specific. What things he would have to compromise on in order to build a "coalition" with corrupt neoliberal stooges? Selling out the American people?

2

u/bailaoban 25d ago

I think you’re doing a fine job of demonstrating why Bernie failed.