An Argument for Sanders's Superior Electability

Based on most recent head to head polls, here is how much better Sanders does than Clinton against Trump in key swing states:

PA +55%
NH +42%
WI +58%
OH +33%
NC +250%
MI +64%
AZ +200%
IN +85%

But, you say, head to head polling isn't accurate during the primaries.

Not entirely correct. With only a couple of exceptions, including Jimmy Carter's failed re-election bids, head to head polling at this point (post-March) in the primary season has been pretty accurate when compared to the actual November results.

Oh, but Hillary has had shit dumped on her for 25 years and Bernie hasn't been battle tested.

Yeah, not entirely true, either.

Bernie has been battle tested in 14 statewide contests when all the shit you've heard about him (mainly from Shillaries) WAS thrown at him and he's still been re-elected and is still the most popular member of Congress in the country.

With Hillary, the fact that she's been (mostly unfairly) pummeled by the Republicans and Fox news for 25 years is not a strength.

It pretty much means that there are fewer people who are willing to be turned her way, plus Republicans inclined not to vote for anyone in response to Trump nomination, will still vote against Hillary -- those are two reasons why Sanders does so much better than she does against Trump.

Bernie has a point when it comes to electability. If Sanders holds all of these states except Indiana (where he is behind by only 1 point), Trump could sin ALL the other battlegrounds, and the Democrats still win the White House. But, Bernie can probably turn Indiana & Nevada, and win NM, Colorado, Oregon, Wisconsin, Iowa, Virginia, and Florida, ending up with over 350 electoral votes.