I would be surprised if they do it - they'd anger their base. There was talk of the Republicans doing it when Trump looked to be winning the primary, but they didn't - it often backfires in this day and age.
Trump trounced the opposition in debates. These debates so far have not had a clear winner IMO. The party is definitely divided between Leftists and Liberals. I believe the party knows Sanders cannot win in the general election so it is hamstrung. I am genuinely curious to see what happens. I was at a meeting with a business owner, who is a Leftist but not as illogical as you. Still he was a Sanders guy but being a business owner he said he will likely vote for Trump due to selfish reasons as his business is doing well and he is nervous the Democrats would raise the minimum wage, which would severely impact his business. Interesting.
He didn't trounce them. His debate skills where nothing - but he knew how to reach out to them, he knew what to say - he's a populist and a showman and he reads his base well. He was the only one of the herd to stand out as different and most importantly - not establishment. And it's non-establishment figures that seem to be rising in elections around the world recently.
I would assume you are any more logical than I. You haven't made that apparent in your debates.
He trounced them. Someone with zero political experience used simple words and phrases to push them out and handily won the nomination. Sometimes the KISS method works. Obviously who is logical or illogical is subjective but to me your posts consistently lack logic and common sense. This is not atypical for Leftists. You call me a “Trumpist”, whatever that means. You’re illogical.
I base it on what I observe in your posts and again - pot, kettle, black. You don't like? Consider how you broad brush others and leftists. We might find a common ground some day.
He trounced them not on his debate abilities or even ideas, but on his ability to reach the base and stand out in a herd of largely similar candidates.
Trump:
Populism
Populism refers to a range of political stances that emphasize the idea of "the people" and often juxtapose this group against "the elite". The term developed in the 19th century and has been applied to various politicians, parties, and movements since that time, although has rarely been chosen as a self-description. Within political science and other social sciences, several different definitions of populism have been employed, with some scholars proposing that the term be rejected altogether.
A common framework for interpreting populism is known as the ideational approach: this defines populism as an ideology which presents "the people" as a morally good force and contrasts them against "the elite", who are portrayed as corrupt and self-serving. Populists differ in how "the people" are defined, but it can be based along class, ethnic, or national lines. Populists typically present "the elite" as comprising the political, economic, cultural, and media establishment, depicted as a homogeneous entity and accused of placing their own interests, and often the interests of other groups—such as large corporations, foreign countries, or immigrants—above the interests of "the people". Populist parties and social movements are often led by charismatic or dominant figures who present themselves as the "voice of the people". According to the ideational approach, populism is often combined with other ideologies, such as nationalism, liberalism, or socialism. Thus, populists can be found at different locations along the left–right political spectrum, and there exist both left-wing populism and right-wing populism.
The Democrats are suffering the same problem in their field of primary candidates - a big herd, kind of similar. Which makes me think their base might go far left, someone who seems non establishment and stands out.
