I suggest that you learn the difference between substantiality and evidentiary support. My arguments do indeed have substance, but they lack evidentiary support because they are as yet speculative. We won’t know until November. But I can point to one very significant data point: Mr. Trump’s victory in 2016, which was partly due to the surprisingly large turnout of disaffected voters. The statistical models used by pollsters did not anticipate such a huge turnout, which is why they failed. Please don’t make the same mistake twice.
“there is no “middle” large enough and passionately against more progressive policies.”
It’s not the middle, it’s the right wing. There were 60 million voters who turned out for Mr. Trump. You dismiss them at your peril.
“ The millions that turn out to vote against it were going to vote for Trump anyway.”
The issue is how strong their motivation will be. Yes, his hardcore supporters will turn out for him regardless. But there remain tens of millions of voters who are not passionately supportive. Mr. Sanders will give them a reason to be passionate.
“The youth vote is much more crucial, and if “ok boomer” galvanizes them to vote, so be it.”
You should check your facts. Boomers will make up the largest segment of the voting population in 2020. More important, if you break up the anti-Trump vote into little pieces, then Mr. Trump will win. Don’t you understand the importance of unity in the face of evil?
I will ask you the same question I have asked many times before, and which few non-Boomers are willing to answer:
I will energetically support whomever is nominated by the Democratic Party. Will you?