2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumBernie wins in smaller, whiter, mostly caucus states. Hillary wins in bigger diverse primary states.
What is this telling us? Hillary is way up in the polls in OH, MI, FL, and IL. If Sanders loses these, it is DEFINITELY over.
I applaud his effort, his candidacy, and what he has brought to the race. But for all intents and purposes, this is over.
Vote2016
(1,198 posts)RBInMaine
(13,570 posts)South. That is about to change on Tuesday where she is heavily favored to win in Michigan.
Vote2016
(1,198 posts)other states (over 10% wins for Hillary in the Deep South and for Sanders outside the South).
Why is Hillary doing so much more poorly in states like Minnesota and Oklahoma and Nebraska and Kansas and Colorado and New Hampshire etc.?
roguevalley
(40,656 posts)won't overturn anyone's votes. There will be blood running in the streets at the convention if she decides to allow the 1% super delegates to have two votes over our one.
Vote2016
(1,198 posts)roguevalley
(40,656 posts)undemocratic thing to say, Vote2016. By the way, I don't remember see you before so welcome to DU.
JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)Check out the Kansas and Nebraska results. Oklahoma, New Hampshire, Vermont, AND COLORADO.
Bernie has won the possibly Democratic states by huge margins compared to Hillary's 1% in Mass. and not much more in Iowa and Nevada.
Bernie is winning by big majorities in Northern states.
We know how the Southern states will vote in November. The same may be sais of Oklahoma, Nebraska and Kansas. Vermont, Colorado and New Hampshire are big wins for Bernie.
Massachusetts, Iowa and Nevada were very close.
Bernie is on a winning streak.
And with the exception of Vermont and Massachusetts, all of these states are somewhat conservative. Wait until Bernie gets voted for in Oregon, Washington and the big one, California -- all Bernie states.
redstateblues
(10,565 posts)Vote2016
(1,198 posts)Qutzupalotl
(14,300 posts)Churches have great GOTV. Southern blacks would be a lot more comfortable voting for an active Christian rather than a secular Jew. They've known the Clintons for decades and see them as heroes; but they've never heard of Sanders, or if they have, it's likely to be shade.
Outside of the bible belt, the country is more secular and more aligned with Sanders' vision for the future.
Xipe Totec
(43,889 posts)Take a chill pill and see you in November.
UMTerp01
(1,048 posts)Yes there is a pattern in terms of the demos Bernie wins and the demos Hillary wins but its not over. Sanders has more than proven why this narrative should not be there. There's plenty of states that haven't yet voted and everyone should have their say. The math doesn't look good for him but I am still interested in seeing the final numbers once its all done.
peacebird
(14,195 posts)See, your side has said he had no chance, then when he clearly had legs your side said his momentum was over... Again. And again, and again.... But like the energizer bunny, Bernie kerps going. Outraising Herself the last 2 months in fact!
So, hey, thanks for your 'concern' but Bernie is in this to win it.
HerbChestnut
(3,649 posts)Thank you for reminding me why after only being registered to this site since the summer I'm already growing tired of it.
TM99
(8,352 posts)states with high numbers. She tied in Iowa, lost heavily in NH & VT, virtually tied in MA, and has lost a lot of blue states. Clinton is going to fail big if she is the GE candidate.
redstateblues
(10,565 posts)Ties. Up is down in Bernieworld
TM99
(8,352 posts)and she was favorited months before at 40% leads, hell yes, they are virtual ties.
JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)Nanjeanne
(4,935 posts)ucrdem
(15,512 posts)Which is kind of a problem as he has a penchant for damaging negative ads of the "found on Twitter" fresh-from-the-VRWC-focus-group variety.
eridani
(51,907 posts)ucrdem
(15,512 posts)Are they important? Yes, but only as many as she needs. As long as Hillary holds the Obama coalition together, and there's no sign that she has plans to do otherwise, she can win enough Independents to eke out a win. Nobody said it would be easy and I've said all along that she's going to need every possible hand on deck to pull it off. That's why Sanders hanging around is a problem. JMHO, YMMV.
eridani
(51,907 posts)Dems were 39% and independents 30%. And where are the 2008 enthusiasm levels?
ucrdem
(15,512 posts)Also don't forget that Hillary has her own constituencies on top of Obama's. But I've never thought it would be anything but a close shave. And while it may well be a Clinton landslide that's nothing to count on.
eridani
(51,907 posts)Lizzie Poppet
(10,164 posts)Hillary has virtually zero appeal with that group.
ucrdem
(15,512 posts)Right now she's focused on winning the nomination but once that's done I imagine she'll shore up her constituencies with a little help from her friends
Angela Bassett talks to students at South Carolina State University while campaigning for Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton earlier this month.
Lizzie Poppet
(10,164 posts)It's a difficult demographic to get to the polls. Obama did it. Hillary has shown no sign of being able to do the same. She polls horribly with those voters.
bkkyosemite
(5,792 posts)jfern
(5,204 posts)eridani
(51,907 posts)Everywhere they are going for Sanders by large margins, and they are 40% of the electorate.
Vote2016
(1,198 posts)Lizzie Poppet
(10,164 posts)Independent moderates will not vote for her in large numbers: they're looking for a political outsider. She has minimal appeal to young voters. A lot of Bernie voters are independent progressives who are not willing to vote for someone they see as a center-right candidate, even if the Republican is worse. Some of the swing states have relatively few black voters, her most loyal constituency.
November could be brutal.
eridani
(51,907 posts)Those grossed out by Trump are very likely to vote for Repubs downticket.
MrMickeysMom
(20,453 posts)... Not surprised.... but disgusted.
silvershadow
(10,336 posts)JonLeibowitz
(6,282 posts)Logical
(22,457 posts)Omaha Steve
(99,573 posts)Fawke Em
(11,366 posts)Double standard much?
Attorney in Texas
(3,373 posts)Oklahoma, Kansas, and Nebraska are Republican states, but the minority Democrats in those states are Progressives.
If you look at the minority Democrats in the Deep South states, even the Democrats they elect are not Progressive (i.e., less accepting of GLBT rights, reproductive health freedoms, collective bargaining rights, sensible gun regulation, etc.).
Clinton's success in the least Progressive region of our country (e.g., where even the Democrats are not Progressive) is not surprising, and those who insert race into the issue are missing the point.
Leaving aside the African American vote in the Deep South, Clinton wins the white vote in those states whereas she loses the white vote elsewhere. This is a cultural non-Progressive voter issue that crosses racial lines in the Deep South. STOP BLAMING AFRICAN AMERICAN VOTERS FOR THE NON-PROGRESSIVE VOTES IN THE DEEP SOUTH. The Dixiecrats (link) were NOT African Americans so stop it.
JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)We have 546 delegates to the Democratic convention.
I have not yet seen a Hillary hard sign. I have a Sanders yard sign in my yard and have seen other ones.
Only one of my neighbors has a Hillary bumper sticker. Lots of Sanders ones.
When I go out to talk to people about Sanders they are already enthusiastic about him. I have campaigned a lot in my life. I have never seen a candidate with as much support as Bernie in my area of Los Angeles.
Not scientific, but then the polls don't seem to be very scientific this year either.
oasis
(49,370 posts)You'll see many here complain about your OP, but what you have stated is undeniably true.
mhatrw
(10,786 posts)She loses or ekes out ties everywhere else.
And this is with the entire force of the Democratic party establishment and corporate media doing everything in their power to shove her down all of our throats.
My God, she is a truly terrible candidate!