Bernie Sanders' position in this cycle is a lot like Trump's in the last one. He has a solid, impassioned base of support that is dwarfed by the majority which is split among the rest of the field. Trump won because the opposition to him could not unify around another candidate to oppose him. This is how it usually works—impassioned, well-organized minorities beat majorities if the majority lacks passion and organization. And so as with Trump, it’s one thing to call Bernie out for some of the crazy stuff from his past, but it’s futile if there is no one else for his impassioned followers to embrace. That’s why Trump won in ’16—nobody emerged who could capture the passion of the base that was drawn to him and still is.
Now perhaps Buttigieg or Klobochar—or Bloomberg--can emerge with enough delegates to beat Bernie, but they won’t capture his base and its energy, and that would be a very bad thing for Democrats. I thought Warren might be able to do this, but it’s clear now she won’t unless something surprising happens. And this problem points to the underlying disadvantage of conventional, rank-and-file Dems, which is that because most of them don’t know what they believe or think, they cannot unite except around a No. They dither this way and that driven by anxiety and uncertainty. They are very good at finding fault, but not very good at affirming something as Good with impassioned commitment. That's how Bernie's supporters differ--they do affirm a vision--his vision--with impassioned commitment, and Democrats are foolish if they ignore or neutralize that.
If Dems nominate Buttigieg, Klobochar, or Bloomberg, they will do so not because they really like these people but because they will see one or the other of them as the most effective No to Trump, and even if that’s good enough in the short run to beat Trump, it won’t be in the long run. The Yes that Bernie supporters feel is an energy that needs to be valued and cultivated.
Even though I doubt it will play out like this, the best possible scenario is for Dems to realize that their best chance is to unite around Sanders and soon. I would have preferred Warren to emerge because she is better suited to play this unifying role, but the Dems must learn from Trump's success in '16, and they won't learn that lesson if they elect another moderate technocrat. Since I don't think there's much there there with either Buttigieg or Klobuchar, I am inclined to think that Bloomberg will emerge as the main Bernie alternative.
If Bloomberg wins the nomination, it would be disaster for the future of the Democratic Party, even if he beats Trump. Too many Dems don't understand that Trump is not an aberration; he's a symptom of a deeper problem. If they think that just getting rid of Trump will return things to normal by electing someone they see as a moderate, establishment type, they are as delusional as the poor souls cheering Trump at his rallies.
Bernie for all his limitations is the best choice for the American future. He's a risky choice, but the likelihood of his failing to beat Trump is multiplied the longer the Dems dither, or if they fail to unite around him when it becomes clear his path to the nomination is the strongest. I think Bloomberg could beat Trump, and I understand the temptation to want to use his money and other resources to do that, but choosing Bloomberg would be the worst possible outcome, short of Trump being re-elected.