Results say more than anecdotes, and the results were that Bernie started off the primary with an unprecedented streak of wins. There's just no plausible way to square that early primary success with the theory that the heart attack doomed his campaign.
And that person you know who doesn't pay attention to politics probably didn't even remember the heart attack by January 2020.
I didn't claim his heart attack doomed his campaign, I'm claiming his heart attack was a major SIGNAL that his campaign was doomed, and as far as "unprecedented wins" goes I guess that's true, I'm not a wonk, electoral primary history isn't my strong suit
But as far as I could tell, Iowa was a complete shitshow, New Hampshire was a "duh" as far as bernie taking it, and Nevada was the only real surprise, after that pictures of Lenin started showing up on the sub and that was hilarious
It wasn't a signal that his campaign was doomed either -- his campaign did quite well when it came time to actually cast votes. He didn't have any other health issues during the campaign, and his heart attack wasn't even a major issue by January.
It had as much of an effect as Biden's "uh uh I guess I'll just stop talking" debate gaffe, which is to say almost none.
If it wasn't a signal then the people in my life couldn't have mentioned it.....or believed he was dead...and if his campaign "did well" then he wouldn't have got gotten washed after Nevada
and his heart attack wasn’t even a major issue by January.
Signals don't have to maintain relevance past whatever it is they're signaling, that's why I used the term "signals" and not "long term trends"
It had as much of an effect as Biden’s “uh uh I guess I’ll just stop talking” debate gaffe
Nobody noticed biden's debate gaffes, people DO notice when a major candidate for the US presidency has a heart attack, the media made sure of that, and impressions like that can outlast even their initial period of relevance, especially among people who aren't as obsessed with politics as we are
Results say more than anecdotes, and the results were that Bernie started off the primary with an unprecedented streak of wins. There's just no plausible way to square that early primary success with the theory that the heart attack doomed his campaign.
And that person you know who doesn't pay attention to politics probably didn't even remember the heart attack by January 2020.
I didn't claim his heart attack doomed his campaign, I'm claiming his heart attack was a major SIGNAL that his campaign was doomed, and as far as "unprecedented wins" goes I guess that's true, I'm not a wonk, electoral primary history isn't my strong suit
But as far as I could tell, Iowa was a complete shitshow, New Hampshire was a "duh" as far as bernie taking it, and Nevada was the only real surprise, after that pictures of Lenin started showing up on the sub and that was hilarious
It wasn't a signal that his campaign was doomed either -- his campaign did quite well when it came time to actually cast votes. He didn't have any other health issues during the campaign, and his heart attack wasn't even a major issue by January.
It had as much of an effect as Biden's "uh uh I guess I'll just stop talking" debate gaffe, which is to say almost none.
If it wasn't a signal then the people in my life couldn't have mentioned it.....or believed he was dead...and if his campaign "did well" then he wouldn't have got gotten washed after Nevada
Signals don't have to maintain relevance past whatever it is they're signaling, that's why I used the term "signals" and not "long term trends"
Nobody noticed biden's debate gaffes, people DO notice when a major candidate for the US presidency has a heart attack, the media made sure of that, and impressions like that can outlast even their initial period of relevance, especially among people who aren't as obsessed with politics as we are