Here's my 2 cents on this analysis/argument. And this will be more clear when the voter file analysis drops. There's a big space between what Ds do now (current "Blue Dog"-type platform) & Sanderism. My research argues Ds should be LEANING IN, Sanderism is LEAPING IN-naked too.
So it is absolutey the most electorally risky thing Ds can do this cycle. As @jonathanchait points out, Sanders would be the most ideologically extreme nominee since Goldwater in '64. While polarization has dramatically decreased the power of "medium voter" theory, we don't know
for sure if it is gone. We know that as of right now, the general electorate makes no real distinction between Sanders & other Ds on the generic ballot test, but we do know that as described in this article, the communism vulnerabilities ARE major vulnerabilities in terms of mod
persuasion voters. And the ideological distribution is what it is. Ideologues (on both sides) never like hearing that their passions and policy preferences aren't mainstream, but its still a mathematical fact that abolishing Ice & making abortion completely illegal are fringe
positions. And in terms of messaging, @TheDemocrats aren't great at offense. A Sanders nomination would require an all-in offensive press- I have such a hard time imaging the that party executing something like that. Sanderism from a defensive posture could be disastrous. On the
other side, the milquetoast candidacy of "He'll Do" Biden (at the other extreme) presents its own challenges, and I've said on a few occasions, he's a risky pick disguised as a safe pick not the least of which reasons is we saw a nice preview of what Senate Rs will do w control
of that chamber in terms of trying to make Biden look corrupt via Hunter Biden's nepotism w Burisma. Its a playbook that worked wonders for them in '16 & won they will unabashedly use again in '20 against Biden. I do want to close on one imp note though, although @jonathanchait
is right that the progressive House candidates posted poor electoral performances in '18, aside from @karaforcongress none were nominated in competitive races that had potential to flip. And Eastman came within 2 pts in her race, which according to my model would have flipped had
the @dccc not gotten spooked and failed to invest in the race, as I show here. We don't know how a progressive will do in a competitive situation, bc we've never had one win the nomination and then be robustly supported. cnu.edu/wasoncenter/ca…
c
