(UPDATE: Something radically changed. Continuing on with my thoughts at that brief moment:)
Trying to imagine how a CCI-Occupy style "coordinated campaign" with a non-Democrat leading the ticket is going to work for a agribusiness rural Democratic Iowa House challenger, when the alternative is not a Green New Deal Democrat but a home school Republican.
I'm not assuming there would BE a coordinated campaign. I assume there would be a Sanders campaign and that any down-ballot candidates who were not affiliated with Our Revolution would be on their own. Result would be a whole lot of ballots with only president marked. I can totally see Sanders hitting 75% in Johnson County and not winning a single other county in Iowa
![](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg0gLj7UlOMiX08cYBnNHvt9kIMbNpwF53qn644lYXEC3PibcEL64MxjEbbZBdrDyB6J8c9PuATk8vgPNN1gpf5rhsTMw5_a2sSjaC3MRJQhSPBSCt8l7zyCqLTyt17xuu1gjjU/s320/vtballot.png)
If Sanders wins nomination (more likely than not) and if he cares about reaching out (less likely than not), respect for the Democratic Party as an institution matters to a lot of us who have been in the trenches fighting to make it better for a long time (30 years for me). There's a lot of wise and experienced people within the Democratic Party who should not be thrown away simply because we prefer a different approach and don't salivate at the words "revolution" and "oligarchy."
I've long said losers don't get to make demands - but candidates who reach out to supporters of defeated rivals (Obama, Bill Clinton) tend to do better than those who say "F*** you, we won, get on board" (Gore, Kerry). But as noted, hostility to the Democratic Party as an institution is a core part of the Sanders brand, so I don't expect it. I think that's a net negative for him, but I hope I'm wrong.
Other thoughts on Nevada: I thought I was silly for giving all the caucus chairs a flipping coin, until Nevada gave everyone a deck of cards.
Cannot stop laughing at these big empty Nevada caucus rooms. Heard MSNBC saying early vote was 2 to 1 or 3 to 1 over caucus attendance. Not sure if that was that precinct or overall. But explains empty rooms. My bet is NSDP underestimated how popular early vote would be. Also, NSDP is a terrible acronym because, well, NSDAP.