Sanders draws 24,000 fans in Boston

[Anti Federalist]

File under: "They hate freedom and do not want it".



Sanders draws more than 20,000 in Boston, building on a strong week

By John Wagner October 3 at 9:23 PM

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/p...a-strong-week/

BOSTON — Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) drew a crowd of more than 20,000 here on Saturday night, building on the momentum of a week during which he posted a quarterly fundraising total that nearly matched that of Hillary Rodham Clinton, his chief rival for the Democratic presidential nomination.

The boisterous turnout at the Boston Convention and Exhibition Center appeared to far exceed a previous record for a primary candidate in Massachusetts: a crowd of about 10,000 that came to see then-senator Barack Obama eight years ago as he campaigned for the presidency, according to the Boston Globe.

Sanders — who has drawn large crowds around the country, including 28,000 in Portland, Ore., in August — also attracted about 6,000 people to a rally earlier Saturday in Springfield, Mass.

Sanders's campaign initially issued an estimate of 20,000 for the rally here. A few hours, it revised the total to 24,000, citing a count of people gathered outside the hall provided by an official at the venue.

Massachusetts is among about a dozen states with primaries or caucuses planned for March 1, the day known as Super Tuesday. Both Clinton and Sanders have started visiting and building organizations in those states, in anticipation of a nominating contest that could remain competitive well beyond Iowa and New Hampshire.

Sanders this week reported raising $26 million during the past three months, just shy of the $28 million Clinton said she had raised. Sanders, who was written off by many as a fringe candidate just a few months ago, referenced his fundraising total early in his hour-long remarks, saying he was proud of the way he had raised money since launching his campaign: from 650,000 donors who’ve given an average of just $30 each.

“I do not represent the agenda of the billionaire class or corporate America, and I do not want their money,” said Sanders, a self-described Democratic socialist. “We are running a people’s campaign. … We have something they don’t have. Look around this room. This is what we have that they don’t have.”

Sanders served up largely the same list of priorities as he does at other stops around the country, including addressing the “grotesque” amount of income inequality in the country, making health care a right and combating climate change.

Sanders also gave a plug Saturday night to the work of Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), a favorite of the political left.

“As your Senator Elizabeth Warren reminds us, this is a rigged economy,” Sanders said. “And this is the economy we are going to fix.”

In the wake of this week’s shootings at a community college in Oregon, Sanders also spoke about the need for some additional gun control measures, including closing the “gun-show loophole” on background checks.

Sanders, who has a mixed record on gun control, including a vote against the landmark Brady Bill in 1993, also stressed the need for improving mental health services.

“In my view, we need a revolution in terms of mental health in this country,” Sanders said. “People who are in crisis should not have to wait weeks or months for the care they need.”

His speech was enthusiastically embraced by the overflow crowd, which interrupted Sanders frequently with applause and chants of “Bernie! Bernie! Bernie!”

Jim Kernohan, a high school physics teacher in Boston, was among those eagerly waiting in the crowd Saturday night to hear Sanders for the first time.

Kernohan, 53, said his son, who works in Manchester, N.H., had recently seen Sanders and told him how electric his appearance was. “So I had to see it for myself,” he said.

Even before Sanders spoke, Kernohan said he was sold on Sanders, based on his calls to provide free public college tuition, tax Wall Street trades and overturn the Citizens United court decision, which has allowed more money to be spent influencing politics.

Justin Mendoza, a Sanders enthusiast who attended the rally, marveled at the energy in the crowd afterward.

“It was beautiful, wasn’t it?” asked Mendoza, 24, a health-care worker in the Boston area.

Sanders had planned to hold a rally in August. It was postponed, however, because the campaign couldn’t find a venue on short notice large enough to hold the number of people they anticipated.

[phill4paul]

What's not to like? "Free" this. "Free" that. The epitome of "Free-dumb."

[TheTexan]

Free stuff? For me??? Nice. Count me in.

[adam220891]

If it's free it's for me!

[hells_unicorn]

It's Boston, frankly I'm surprised only 24,000 people showed up as that whole city loves it some free stuff.

[Anti Federalist]

What's not to like? "Free" this. "Free" that. The epitome of "Free-dumb."

You're so right comrade, what the hell was I thinking?

[Mr.NoSmile]

Impressive turnout, I'll admit. You don't see Paul attracting those kind of numbers right now.

[CPUd]

Impressive turnout, I'll admit. You don't see Paul attracting those kind of numbers right now.

He's not trying to yet. They are still doing 3-5 a day in smaller venues. The big ones are better in 2016 when people start voting.

[RPES1]

He's not trying to yet. They are still doing 3-5 a day in smaller venues. The big ones are better in 2016 when people start voting.

What a load of $#@!! You can bet your sweet ass if Rand could pull those numbers right now he would. What would he have to lose?

[hells_unicorn]

What a load of $#@!! You can bet your sweet ass if Rand could pull those numbers right now he would. What would he have to lose?

Peaking too early maybe? Take a look at Trump in a couple months and, absent some unforeseen act of providence, you'll see how far a massive crowd at a single event gets you. When you have nearly 100 million people voting, having 20,000 people showing up at an event is having less than 1/10th of a percent of the total electorate. It may look impressive to an individual onlooker, but to voters as a collective, it looks like a cult.

[CPUd]

What a load of $#@!! You can bet your sweet ass if Rand could pull those numbers right now he would. What would he have to lose?

I'm sure he'd take if he got it; they've been having to open up extra space for the ones he's been having. Scheduling concert halls and stadiums require a lot more logistically (and financially) than conference rooms and barns. If they're gonna do that, they need to make it count, because it could backfire. Remember Mitt's campaign had that rally in the football stadium for 250 people that got made fun of for the next few weeks.

[RPES1]

Peaking too early maybe? Take a look at Trump in a couple months and, absent some unforeseen act of providence, you'll see how far a massive crowd at a single event gets you. When you have nearly 100 million people voting, having 20,000 people showing up at an event is having less than 1/10th of a percent of the total electorate. It may look impressive to an individual onlooker, but to voters as a collective, it looks like a cult.

Oh please, if Rand was worried about peeking early he shouldn't have been one of the first to enter the race.

[hells_unicorn]

Oh please, if Rand was worried about peeking early he shouldn't have been one of the first to enter the race.

Entering early and peaking early are not the same thing, please open a dictionary.

[CPUd]

Oh please, if Rand was worried about peeking early he shouldn't have been one of the first to enter the race.

The 3 Senators were the first to enter the race because as sitting Senators, they couldn't solicit donations directly for their PACs as non-candidates like Bush could. Bush had almost the entire Q2 to put together a $100M war chest before he declared as a candidate.

[RPES1]

The 3 Senators were the first to enter the race because as sitting Senators, they couldn't solicit donations directly for their PACs as non-candidates like Bush could. Bush had almost the entire Q2 to put together a $100M war chest before he declared as a candidate.

Okay, I can understand that. But, to say hes not trying to pull big crowds is just completely wrong. If all the media can do at this point is ask why you are still in the race, I believe its time to start trying.

[erowe1]

I don't get why people don't think an event with Sanders would be a huge boon for Rand.

[PaleoPaul]

Puhleeze. It's Massachusetts. Let me know when he pulls that kind of crowd in a swing state like Virginia, Florida, Nevada, Colorado, or Ohio, or better yet, in a red state like South Carolina, Indiana, or Texas.

[CaptUSA]

I think people are jumping to some pretty big conclusions here.

Just because people are supporting Sanders does not mean they believe in his philosophy. If we've learned anything from Ron Paul's numbers over the years, it's that a large portion of people are just contrarian and will be attracted to any politician who expresses contrarian thoughts. Whether that be Paul, Sanders, or Trump.

Most people inherently think the system is stacked against them. It's just that few people really understand the true reasons why. Ron Paul was unique in that regard. Unfortunately, a large portion of Ron Paul's supporters never fully understood those reasons - in fact, many of them didn't really care anyway.

[Chester Copperpot]

what did sanders say about getting rid of the federal reserve?

[SilentBull]

I think people are jumping to some pretty big conclusions here.

Just because people are supporting Sanders does not mean they believe in his philosophy. If we've learned anything from Ron Paul's numbers over the years, it's that a large portion of people are just contrarian and will be attracted to any politician who expresses contrarian thoughts. Whether that be Paul, Sanders, or Trump.

Most people inherently think the system is stacked against them. It's just that few people really understand the true reasons why. Ron Paul was unique in that regard. Unfortunately, a large portion of Ron Paul's supporters never fully understood those reasons - in fact, many of them didn't really care anyway.

Exactly right!! For a while I was under the impression that all the Ron Paul supporters I knew actually read about and understood economics, since Ron got me interested in the subject. I started realizing a lot of them didn't understand anything. Some of them started supporting socialized medicine, and that's when I realized I was in the minority of the minority.

[Feeding the Abscess]

Peaking too early maybe? Take a look at Trump in a couple months and, absent some unforeseen act of providence, you'll see how far a massive crowd at a single event gets you. When you have nearly 100 million people voting, having 20,000 people showing up at an event is having less than 1/10th of a percent of the total electorate. It may look impressive to an individual onlooker, but to voters as a collective, it looks like a cult.

100 million people don't vote in party primaries.