Home | About | Donate

Why Surprising Numbers of Republicans Vote for Bernie Sanders


Why Surprising Numbers of Republicans Vote for Bernie Sanders

Thom Hartmann

Ann Coulter knows who she wants to be the Democratic nominee for president, and who that person is, well, it may surprise you.

She wants Hillary Clinton to be the nominee, and thinks that if Bernie gets the nod, he'll beat whoever the Republicans come up with to run against him.

You won't hear me say this often, but Ann Coulter is right.


This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.


A regime dominated by a dysfunctional and corrupt elite must rely upon the most ignorant, prejudiced and jingoistic of the population. But there are real limits on how long such a ship of fools can stay afloat. Their mutually shared fantasies are sinking hard by the bow and are nearing the final plunge to the bottom. The real problem is that we on the left are to prepare and man the lifeboats while the others blithely rearrange the deck chairs. We are to try to save as many as we can, but a whole lot are going down with the ship.


Who? just kidding as it is early. I’ve been listening to Bernie since 2000 on Thom Hartmann radio show until the conglomerate Clear Channel shut down progressive talk radio in Oregon and around the country in 2013. Now we have Thom back on XRay.fm our of Portland and I get to listen to Thom again everyday. We need someone with a big stick and a carrot to break up these too big to exist conglomerate sycophants. Maybe his age is good, he has nothing to loose, his career has been long and wanting to appease and win the next election won’t be his only motivation. Maybe he can get things done. But we the people do need to elect a Congress that is not dysfunctional.


It’s not just Ann Coulter rooting for Hillary, today the Chicago Tribune printed a piece by Paul Waldman of The American Prospect allaying the fears of those who think Hillary is on a downward spiral. Neither the Tribune, nor Chicago’s mayor, want to see Bernie muddying the waters, with all due respect to the late great Muddy Waters.


You exchanged the poll numbers and other FACTS in Mr. Hartman’s article to put YOUR Talking Points (pro-Hillary) in their place. Another tag teamer…


How does this odd post relate to the poll numbers and what they evidence about ACTUAL voters’ positions on key issues?


I don’t mean to be argumentative. However, my point is that times are different now and maybe Eugene V. Debs would run as a Democrat. You’re arguing a counterfactual and so there’s no way in the world that anyone could know what Mr. Debs would do today.

There are advantages to running at a Dem that Lawrence Lessig for example, doesn’t have. One big one is the publicity that comes with running as a Democrat instead of an independent.


It bears repeating that during primaries in many states one has to register with the Democratic Party in order to vote for Bernie Sanders.

In Iowa in particular the Democratic Party caucus in February is for registered Democrats. Governor Howard Dean in 2003 drew large bipartisan crowds throughout Iowa, but he was clobbered by mainline Dems John Kerry and John Edwards, who went on to lose the disputed 2004 election.

As I am registered with the Green Party, I will not be joining Bernie’s camp in the Iowa Democratic caucus, even for a day.


I never thought I would find myself agreeing with Ann Coulter. Having said that: 10:1 HRC is the Democratic nominee for President. But would love to lose that bet!


Robert, your commentary is not unlike the punditry broadcast on MSNBC.

So in your opinion who would you like to see win the Presidency? Who most represents the interests of the majority of US citizens?


What I find inconsistent with your commentary is on the one hand you argue from the standpoint of political pragmatism on electability and then you argue that O’Malley is the most electable.

I don’t quite get the calculus given the current standing that Bernie has along with what is clearly a trend of rising support.

In your pragmatism it is your opinion that O’Malley is better positioned than Bernie from an electability standpoint?

Doesn’t seem to make much sense.


Hooray! Bernie is the Obama of 2016!


Wow! You read way too much into my comment. I’ll repeat the point again and I think it’s indisputable. There’s no way of knowing what Eugene V. Debs would do were he alive. It’s a counterfactual. There’s just no way.

Are you a socialist? What does that mean to you? Could you please explain why or why not?


Does the Civil Rights movement count as a social movement? Was the Democratic party the graveyard of that social movement?


Somehow you never mention O’Malley’s pitiful poll numbers? He stands little chance of being elected and not only are his polls ridiculously low but most of the country doesn’t even know who he is or anything about him.

You seem to love to ‘quote’ polls so how about quoting O’Malley’s poll numbers?


I think they see it too. Well I guess Hillary can count on a few more votes… from all of the republican candidates! :innocent: Lol

I think Bernie really scares the oligarchy… for the first time, it doesn’t look like the game is rigged so that oligarchy wins no matter who gets elected.

Go Bernie… for all of us!


“For years, Sanders has attacked immigrant workers…” That is not true, and it is a slander. Any fair minded reader can read about Bernie’s position through time at the linked site. The notion that one has to be involved in international socialism isn’t written in stone, nothing of a practical political matter is written in stone. Socialism has many varieties, I consider myself a democratic socialist and don’t look to the people you quote for any sort of imprimatur. Open border immigration is bad for all concerned, except the plutocrats and exploiters of human labor.


I have no intention of going through what you wrote line for line, Bernie never attacked immigrants–Period. Again, neither you nor the WSWS are the final arbiters of what socialism is.


Sorry, but no drug warrior will get my vote: