"Before Senator Bernie Sanders announced he would run as a Democratic candidate for president in 2020, the establishment media was already previewing arguments that would be spread to suggest Sanders was still “unelectable.”

Jonathan Cohn articulated it best in an article for In These Times. “It is important to remember so-called electability is no more a science than astrology. Indeed, it is often little more than calcified prejudice.”

“Candidates up and down the ballot routinely disprove the notion that only white or male or centrist candidates can win a competitive election. And they do so by inspiring everyday people to put blood, sweat and tears (and money) into their campaigns,” Cohn wrote. So, when weighing which presidential candidate to back in the Democratic primary, voters should dispense with a definition of “electability” that relies on gaming out what other voters will do.”

All too often media commentators, political strategists, and individuals with past histories working on presidential campaigns seek to manipulate voters into behaving like managers of democracy.

Citizens are not managers of democracy. They do not need to concern themselves with political strategy and cynical concepts like “electability.” To the extent that voting actually matters, a citizen’s job should be to vote their conscience.

There are many arguments against Sanders — several which existed in some form back in 2016 election and were dusted off for 2020.

Most of the arguments against Sanders have origins rooted in bad faith. They depend upon some calcified prejudice held by the individuals or groups advancing these arguments.

The following is a guide to the many bad faith arguments that dominate much of the political discussion around Bernie Sanders’ campaign in the press."