[dragonwriter]

> Not even most of the Democratic base will vote for a white male socialist in his 70's over Hillary,

Perhaps.

> and he has no chance of winning the general election even if he were nominated.

The national head-to-head polls I've seen that have included have him beating all the Republicans he is polled against (Trump, Bush, Walker, and Rubio), in some cases by wider margins than Clinton does in the same polls. That's not to say he would win the general if nominated, but I'd certainly expect more than mere assertion from someone who wanted me to accept their argument that he certainly would not do so.

[philwelch]

Those polls are meaningless 14 months ahead of the general election. Trump is a highly polarizing figure who (a) will also almost certainly not win the nomination and (b) is widely hated enough that he would likely lose head-to-head against a ham sandwich. The other Republican candidates don't have hardly any name recognition because Trump is monopolizing all the media attention.

I'm not sure how much elaboration you need for the idea that an avowed socialist wouldn't be elected President of the United States.