So true. In fact, he'll do better with more Republican NON-voters! For so many years, every candidate has had to account for voter apathy - in the end, it's how Hillary Clinton lost in 2016.

Part of my hopes hang on all those Republicans zealots and sycophants* relying on political inertia for Trump, i.e., "He'll get in, of course. He's a shoe-in. So I don't have to vote."

It's not polarized; it happens in BOTH parties. I hope it's the Republicans' turn.

*Yes, I know these are two types who probably WILL vote.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++

That was exactly my thinking, Jason, but I didn't want to come right out and say it. Running for President when you've recently had a heart attack is not a good idea, regardless of age, because of the stress of the job. 

And if Trump wins re-election, and Sanders is still alive, I hope he has the sense to not run again. Or that if he does, the voters have the sense to not care. 

So what is there to gain by telling everyone else to “screw themselves”?

1) Medicare for all, as Medicare itself, or Social Security, or school lunches, or any other programs of this nature. The programs can be VERY confusing, and the phrase "Medicare for all" is as confusing as "Obamacare" is. It's really hard.

2) And a lot of Americans won't ask for clarification. Because they're dumb.

Too many people wait until a change is effected, and complain about it after the fact. Sadly, our political masters (once political servants) don't have to explain it and don't care to.

That having been said: I agree with Bernie* on a lot but personally don't like him.  He's edging on being a demagogue with a condescending air, he's an isolationist, and has very little actual practical plans for how to achieve his goals or how to get his agenda through Congress - and when pressed on that last part in interviews, his answer is always that he's going to go out and hold rallies to pressure Congress.

I also agree with Bloomberg - he's strong on fighting gun violence and has been so for years, strong on climate, and also aligns with me on many other social policies. And while I sympathize with fears that a technocrat billionaire feels like no progress will be made on any of the financial disparity platforms, I wonder at the demonization of him from the idea of him being super-wealthy.  That historically makes no sense, as FDR (the patron saint of American social programs) came from the upper class and was indeed labelled as a class traitor at the time.  But he's definitely going to alienate the self-proclaimed progressive wing of the party and I fear that's going to have a similar dampening effect on the turnout to 2016.

Ultimately my preferred candidates are Warren (Bernie policies but with actual plans and a style I can get behind) and Buttigieg (a bit more of a centrist but along with Warren, blindingly smart and articulate).  They're both fading, though.  So it appears now to be between Mike and Bernie.  Speaking as a New York Jew myself: this is fucking weird.  And the breakdown there is the larger question NOT of who the Democratic Party is (one election is not solving that) but what's the best strategy to win?  To wit: somehow win over more of the Obama voters and independents who went for Trump?  Or fire up the 'progressive' base so much that they come out in overwhelming numbers?

Neither seems like a sure bet.  I wish Biden had done better, as my larger strategy was to vote in the primaries for the candidate with the largest national support from African Americans.  Why he's so bad at actually arguing the point of his reliably liberal voting record is a mystery.

*In 2016 I took one of the more well-vetted online tests to see where I aligned.  Trump was 24% (mostly, I presume, because of his stated support for infrastructure spending), while Hillary was 97% and Bernie was 94%.  Apparently that 3% difference was large enough to drive an SST through for a lot of voters.

78 is far far too old. Cognitive decline, physical strength - these all fade hugely in your mid seventies.

Just look at what happened in the UK when a left wing party went with its “principles” and chose an old extreme candidate.

It ended up screwing the UK hugely. 

Socialist systems in social areas seems reasonable. Capitalist systems in capitalist areas also seems reasonable.