And think of if he gets at least one more. Also the hundreds of young, unqualified, hand picked by Trump judges who are in lower high level Judge positions throughout the country for the rest of their lives. And all the people who have to go before them with cases affecting their lives and the law.

I am encouraged by the left wing of the party actually addressing issues rather than pandering to Republicans for the first time that I can remember.

My post is actually making the opposite point though. I will be voting for the Democrat running against Tump regardless of whether it is my favorite progressive.

@MissKathleen

There are many democrats who would compromise and give Trump what he wants.

Even if we could prevent him getting his way, wouldn't it be better to have a Democrat president who can get things done?

Call me crazy but I don't think more grid lock is a good thing. And he would continue to use his executive orders.

@MissKathleen

If democrats aren't willing to give republicans what they want, why was the patriot act recently extended? Why did the already enormous military budget get even larger by billions of dollars? Why does Trump now have a space force to brag about? Why is there a new NAFTA that's even worse than the old one? All of these things went through the democratic controlled House with Nancy Pelosi at the helm. Those sound like some very significant compromises to me. And what did we get out of them? Parental leave for federal workers. That's great, but not only was it a compromise, it was a lopsided compromise in their favor.

If they take back the Senate, they will surely have more power and will need to compromise less. But they will have no chance at vetoing anything. Two thirds majority is needed in both houses of Congress. There is no possible way to get enough for a two thirds majority in the Senate without also winning the presidency. Even if we win the presidency, it's extremely unlikely that we would get Two Thirds. The way to win the Senate is through very high turnout for the presidency. People come out in large numbers to vote for president and vote for senator while they're at it. Without those large numbers, the senate can't be won, and with those large numbers, the presidency will definitely be won.

The presidency has been increasing in power over the decades. it is now much more important to control it than Congress. There's is no way we will have enough Senate votes to veto him so there would be much he could be able to do to continue causing harm. He must replaced. That is most important. And the upshot is, if we put enough effort into winning the presidency, the Senate will most likely come along with it because it will take a very large turn out to win and if we have a large enough to turnout to win, that means many dem Senators will be winning too. Then we have it all and we can reverse this damage and start making positive reforms to deal with all the crises we are facing.

@MissKathleen

Yes, I get it, the incumbent is likely to win. So what, we shouldn't try?

You don't seem to understand that your strategy of attempting to take the Senate but not go for the presidency does not exist in politics. It makes no sense.

The best chance we have is to nominate the candidate who has the best chance to beat Trump and hopefully bring the Senate along with him. Bernie has the most momentum, he has the most popular policies, he has the youth energy, independents are with him because he was an independent for most of his career and he is anti-establishment, he is the most likable Senator in the nation, he is shattering individual donor records, he is ranked most trusted on the biggest issue of the election- healthcare... This is what a movement looks like. This is how we win.