>>>>Is it true that the dems would rather disband than have Sanders as their candidate?
>>>
>>>Can't speak for "the dems" but that doesn't seem likely.
>>>
>>>Lots of repubs said that they'd never support Trump and look what happened.
>>
>>There's an opinion among the (local) forum members here that if Bernie ever beats the party machinery and its machinations (just look at the staged 'technical fiasco' at Iowa), the party support will be lukewarm at best, with restricted access to the MS media (pun intended). They'd rather have 4 more years of Trump than have Bernie. Easier to stay entrenched that way.
>
>Follow the money.
>BTW, since you are "retired", they could use some help in Iowa.

If there was any to use. I consider them beyond the point where help would mean anything. Actually, the most likely scenario, as it looks now: dems go the extra mile to have anyone but Bernie as a candidate, displaying all the arrogance and disdain against the will of the(ir own) people. At least 55% of their usual voters don't bother to vote or vote for Trump. Democratic party becomes irrelevant, and the cabal loses interest of big money.

p.s. this morning I saw an educational video where it's explained that the preferred way of pronunciation is boddydgidge (!). You gotta be kidding me.