Surprise For NYT: BERNIE IS ELECTABLE!

[MFrohike]

136. Ok

1. Brown wasn't a serious challenger, yet it took months to put him away. Good to know. Kerrey is a Medal of Honor winner from Nebraska, but don't let facts get in the way of your story. Tsongas wasn't a natural rival, he was seen as the most serious, most electable candidate. He also had the personality of a dead fish, which ain't a plus in electoral politics.

2. Clinton's charm works whether it's positive or negative. It was, and is, independent of whatever he's selling on a given day.

3. I understand 2010 quite well. We had much higher than normal turnout because the horns of Gondor got sounded on both right and left via negative campaigning. You can cite all the wingnuts you want, but it's completely irrelevant. You're emphasizing preaching to the choir while I'm talking about preaching fear to the electorate at large. It's not me who doesn't understand how this works.

4. I don't know if conservatism is a negative mindset. I do know conservatives are generally useless in real-world questions because they're always busy spouting off hypotheticals that bear no relation to reality.

5. Bernie is a take-no-prisoners screamer? He's advocating a platform that's fully in line with mid-century Democratic politics. Seriously, do you know anything about Democratic history at all? Damn, man, he's barely to the left of Truman or Johnson on economic policy. If you seriously think that's extreme, you need to rethink your worldview.

6. Campaigning as an angry extremist? I'm sorry, I didn't know that calling out George Bush for lying when he claimed al Qaeda was best buds with Saddam was taking an extreme position. I must have missed that in Suskind's book.

You'd do a lot better if you dealt with actual facts instead of bad reasoning based on make-believe and snide invective.