Wow Man That Was A Huge Bernie Rally

Sen. Bernie Sanders.

As the Denver Post’s Alex Burness reports, but from the look of it plenty of our readers were there:

Sen. Bernie Sanders took the stage in Denver on Sunday evening to a deafening roar from a crowd of many thousands of people who rarely let up…

Sanders spent only a fraction of his roughly 35-minute speech criticizing President Donald Trump. That segment of the speech was concise and forceful, with Sanders calling Trump “a pathological liar who is running a corrupt administration, who has no clue what the Constitution of the United States is about, who is a bully, who is vindictive, who is a racist, who is a sexist, who is a homophobe, who is a xenophobe, who is a religious bigot.”

These and many other lines drew ear-shattering applause. A significant portion of the crowd arrived hours early, and some waited in hour-long lines to buy campaign stickers and shirts. The campaign claimed more than 11,000 people attended, a total confirmed by a fire department official.

Colorado Public Radio’s Sam Brasch:

“Don’t tell anybody, but I think we’re gonna win here in Colorado!” he told supporters on Sunday.

The massive crowd packed into adjoining exhibition halls at the Colorado Convention Center responded with deafening cheers.

After narrowly winning in New Hampshire, Sanders has taken the lead in most national polls for the Democratic nomination. The state of the race in Colorado is much harder to nail down…

Westword’s Chase Woodruff:

“If we are going to bring about the fundamental change that we need in this country, we have got to address the incredible power of the corporate elite,” Sanders said. “What this campaign is about is not just beating Trump — it’s taking on the greed and corruption of Wall Street, the insurance industry, the drug companies, the fossil-fuel industry, the military-industrial complex. It’s taking on the entire one percent, the corporate establishment, the political establishment, and telling them: This country belongs to all of us.”

It will take a powerful grassroots movement, Sanders told the crowd, to enact a sweeping political agenda that includes new taxes on corporations and the rich, the cancellation of student debt, federal legalization of marijuana, and a climate-change plan that he called the most ambitious ever proposed. But this uncompromising vision is what helped draw thousands of supporters to the Denver rally, where they cheered transformative ideas like Sanders’s Medicare for All proposal, which would abolish private health insurance and replace it with a universal, government-run program.

For those keeping score, the estimated 11,000 people who turned out to see Sen. Bernie Sanders last night at the Colorado Convention Center would not physically fit inside the 8,000-seat Broadmoor World Arena in Colorado Springs, where President Donald Trump is set to hold his own campaign rally later this week. So, there’s that. Of course, those 11,000 attendees are only good for a single vote each, and with 1.1 million Democrats and 1.5 million unaffiliated voters in Colorado in receipt of Democratic primary ballots no crowd short of a Broncos Super Bowl victory parade can predict much. We do expect to see polling soon that will give us a clearer picture of the race in Colorado.

In the meantime, it was a compelling night for those so inclined to “Feel The Bern.”

0 Shares

21 Community Comments, Facebook Comments

  1. MADCO says:

    C'mon

    "calling Trump 'a pathological liar who is running a corrupt administration, who has no clue what the Constitution of the United States is about, who is a bully, who is vindictive, who is a racist, who is a sexist, who is a homophobe, who is a xenophobe, who is a religious bigot.'

    "… And that's the best I can say about him – it goes downhill after that."

    Bernie was energetic and energizing

  2. JohnInDenverJohnInDenver says:

    Great to see a crowd out …

    Anyone know of a public poll being taken in Colorado?  Last one at 538 and Real Clear Politics is dated Aug. 20, 2019 — and a few things have changed since then.

     

    • MADCO says:

      A. only poll that matters is underway. Ends 2 weeks from tomorrow.
      Bernie is going to 'win'

      2. In the general – several D's are beating Trump

       

      • DENependent says:

        A new poll would be useful to me before I cast my vote. My first choice is Warren, but if she is very far from breaking 15% here in Colorado I would like to move to a choice with a better chance.

        • Diogenesdemar says:

          Thinking you have to vote for “The Winner” for your primary vote to count for anything??? Vote for her anyway.  Voters’ preferences will send a message to whoever the eventual final winner is.

          (. . . And, I don’t think I’m saying that just because I’ve already voted for Warren, and I don’t want to feel lonely . . . But, maybe I am?)

           

          • DENependent says:

            That is valid position, but it is effectively abstaining with a comment much like voting for a third party in the general election.

            I prefer to vote for a second choice if doing so will send a delegate to a potentially divided convention. If Warren is close to or over 15% I’ll vote for her. If her support is under 9% I’m going to switch to someone who can get delegates in case it matters at the convention. I’m not going to mindlessly vote for whoever is the “winner”.

            This is much like only choosing to vote third party if your big party candidate is outside the margin of error of losing or winning in polls. It is more complex since potentially there are more viable choices in a proportional vote.

            • Diogenesdemar says:

              Nope. In the primary we’re afforded that all-too-rare, uniquely American, opportunity and privilege of ever getting to vote for who we’d like to see win, almost completely risk free . . .

              . . . It’s in the general that we hold our noses, and do our duty to the country to select between the least offensive lesser of two evils.

              Enjoy voting in the primary, while you can!

              (Never having the satisfaction of, and getting to enjoy, voting for whoever you really want is pretty much a sure-fire guaranteed way to ensure that someday you completely snap, become hopelessly cynical, and do something really horribly and unforgivably stupid, . . . like voting for Ralph Nader, or Jill Stein in a general?! )

  3. itlduso says:

    Mayor Pete will be in Aurora on Saturday night.  Is he telegraphing a belief that he won't do well in Nevada on Saturday (i.e, pulling a Biden who left NH for SC on primary night)?

    • MADCO says:

      Maybe the availability of early preference polling reduces the importance of the actual caucus date.
      I read the Nevada DSP – and I don't really understand how it works this year, but I'm sure NV democrat caucus participants do. Or will. How hard could it be?

       

       

      • JohnInDenverJohnInDenver says:

        In 2016, one results summary said 12,233 caucused in Nevada. Final delegate apportionment after caucus and convention:  24 Clinton, 16 Sanders, 3 uncommitted.

        In 2020, in the first two (of 4) days of early voting, 26,000 had participated. We don’t know how many followed the rules and had at least 3 ranked preferences marker, or how many wound up with their choice followed by uncommitted and uncommitted for the other two.  Or how many chose all 5 of their possible slots.

        If they did choose at least 3, their votes will be assigned to their precincts and counted along with those who are there in person — first preference and, if that candidate doesn’t become “viable,” the lower preferences are considered until they match a viable candidate.

        • MattC says:

          Do Colorado caucuses do that?

          • Duke CoxDuke Cox says:

            Kinda…only live…on one day. I don’t think they do a multiple choice ballot. Just a few of them until done. Not much need for all the verification..

            As I recall. 

            Short, mid, and long term memory loss noted here. Been a while.

        • JohnInDenverJohnInDenver says:

          Sorry … Nevada Democrats only reported the (much) smaller count — of "county delegate" equivalents. More research … 2016 had an estimated 80,000 at caucus meetings in Nevada. 

          • MattC says:

            What I am taking away – Nevada is going to a confusing cluster, and the the media will get to spend some time hyping ratings about which was more jumbled, Iowa or Nevada. They'll find some gambling /corn connection allowing anyone anywhere to scoff and demean the Dems.

            At least until the Texas primary 'results'  March 4, 5, 6…
            Which can be the story until Arizona vote March 10.

             

            Got it..

  4. Diogenesdemar says:

    What this campaign is about is not just beating Trump — it’s taking on the greed and corruption of Wall Street, the insurance industry, the drug companies, the fossil-fuel industry, the military-industrial complex. It’s taking on the entire one percent, the corporate establishment, the political establishment,

    A couple o’ thots: . . . 

    1.  That’s all great.  Really.   But, could we maybe, please, just concentrate on taking down Ttump as our causa principalis? Lots of people would be really, really happy with just that.

    Maybe even convince some of those listed secondary ne’er-do-wells that it would also be in their interest too, in all Americans’ interests really, to jettison the OD?

    2.  This is where I really start to have my concerns and misgivings with Bernie.  I mean, I think it’s really great that he wants to show the world that he can use a walker and chew gum at the same time, but gawwwd, the almost borderline unhinged yelling-at-the-parking-meter rhetoric . . .

    It’s gonna’ take a broad, broad coalition to take down Ttump (see #1 above).  Insulted enemies rarely make good coalition members, or any kind of coalition members actually.

    3.  Instead of all of this bombast, how about a Bernie sweetened by a dollop of, oh I don’t know, maybe Krugman?  How about maybe taking the time to explain to all those groups, that in the long-run it’s in their interest, too, to have:  a functioning and expanding middle-class, a well-educated citizenry of future employees and investors, less income inequity, affordable housing, clean air and water, coastal cities with roads and sidewalks instead of swamps and canals, health care that provides wellness and longevity instead of emergency room pricing, less racism and xenophobia and more diversity and inclusion, global stability and some of the security of transparent semi-certainty — instead of pinball transactional zero-sum shakedowns, on and on and on????

    This stuff is all good and reasonable, convince folks instead of accuse, maybe?

    This 21st-century brand of American short-term avarice and short-sighted greed is doing no one any good, except our competitor nations and our competitors in those other nations.

    We didn’t get to this shitty place in just one election cycle, we’re not going to get out from here in just one election cycle. We need a curative process, not a witch-doctor’s magic beans. (“Only I can fix it,” probably won’t fool enough of ‘em twice.)

    4.  People have a way of embracing wide-eyed idealists.  People also have a way of shunning wild-eyed lunatics.

    It’s sometimes a thin line …

    . . .

    Four years of bombast and hyperbole have been enough for most folks. I think it’s a surprisingly small number of voters who are gonna’ look forward to hearing too old coots yell at each other apoplecticly on their televisions, all day and all night, for the next eight and one-half months???

    • MattC says:

      I have to disagree.
      If Sanders narrowed his focus to "beat Trump" the excitement level would be diminished. Ok for those who don't want him as the nominee, but an ineffective way to campaign.
      Historically, candidates who aren't for something, who campaign only on what they are against, get tagged badly and never recover. We call them "losers."

      The framing is critical and not always controllable.
      I am for making sure Trump is not elected is emotionally very different from I am for stabilizing Social Security and Medicare. I am for a green economy, I am for creating economic opportunity by eliminating student debt.

      You get the point.

      I love Elizabeth Warren. A million years ago in college, she had run the TARP, and was creating the CFPB when I learned about her. I was assigned a video of a talk she did about why the middle class was falling behind.

      I agree with you that in the primary- voters should vote their heart.  There are names on the Colorado ballot I had to look up and candidates who have dropped. Voting for them even though they won't be delegate viable can make perfect sense. Especially if then that voter attends caucus to select the actual delegates.

       

      • Conserv. Head Banger says:

        What I noticed about the Bernie rally were interviews with a couple people, after the rally.

        "Great, if he's elected, we won't have to pay back out student loans." Somebody has to pay.

        • MattC says:

          Why is it that Trump and his investors – or anyone and their investors – can go bankrupt and never pay back their lenders?

          Why is it that an uninsured driver can cause damage and injury – and declare bankruptcy to discharge that debt?

          But a student loan stays with the borrower forever?

          Maybe the student borrower is stupid.
          But then so is the casino builder and the driver.

        • Duke CoxDuke Cox says:

          Sure…how about the folks making a killing in the tax cut generated market boom?

           

Leave a Reply

Comment from your Facebook account


You may comment with your Colorado Pols account above (click here to register), or via Facebook below.