Clinton won the nomination because her coalition is incredibly diverse

[Godhumor]

This discussion thread was locked by EarlG (a host of the 2016 Postmortem forum).

When you win the black demographic by an average greater than 50% across all states whether they're North or South, you're going to win. When you win the total non-white vote by an average of 30% across all states, you're going to win. When the age groups that are consistent voters go to you by an average of 25%, you're going to win. When you win women by an average of 15-20%, you're going to win.

This was a nomination race where demographic blocks tended to vote consistently across all states. And Clinton won the groups that generally decide the Democratic nominee.

In reality, this was a very linear and predictable race and outcome.

[bravenak]

1. This is absolutely true

[Hortensis]

50. True. It's huge. And it's very desirable

that it happen this way, that national candidates cannot win by wooing a dominant block as in the past.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

2. There is nothing you wrote an objective observer could take exception to.

[TwilightZone]

3. She also tied Sanders with voters who identified as "very liberal" and easily won "somewhat liberal"

and "moderates". The latter two were 56/43 and 60/37, respectively.

So, not only was her support demographically diverse, it was also ideologically diverse, including winning half of the most liberal voters.

http://graphics.wsj.com/elections/2016/how-clinton-won/

[Godhumor]

4. Good point

It is almost like she is an effective campaigner, or something.

[winetourdriver]

7. effective

She is a master, and the campaign that she and PBO will put together will be stunningly effective.

[Walk away]

13. We know she will win. The trick is to win back the Senate and a big chunk of the House!

I think they can do it. This is the perfect election to pull in Moderate Republicans women. They are the key to making inroads to gerrymandered congressional districts in swing states.

If we can do that, we will be one step closer to taking back Congress. This is the year to do it.

[brer cat]

5. Very true.

I don't see how anyone could disagree with that.

[Thinkingabout]

6. She has work hard for many years to help others have a better life.

[Chasstev365]

8. Her coalition of diverse party insiders?

[leftofcool]

28. tick tock

[Live and Learn]

9. I only see 2 types of supporters she has. Sorry, I can't elaborate but you can use your imagination.

[Walk away]

14. Democrats and Independents????

Whatever two they are, they greatly outnumber any of her opponents in the Primaries (and apparently) the General! There may be only 2 types in your mind but they are the types who win!

[Live and Learn]

18. Nope. Hint: It really isn't good news that there are so many of them. nt

[Walk away]

22. Gosh! I can't imagine what you mean! I'm just happy that Hillary won the primary....

by a double digit lead, and I am ecstatic to see her polling against Trump shows the same! As a lifelong Democrat I can't think of anything better than my Democratic candidate winning the next Presidential election and continuing the policies of President Obama!

And it's especially great that so many moderates will be moving over and voting against Trump. Next year we will be able to kick the NRA right out the door of our government!

[Live and Learn]

24. ROFL. nt

[Lord Magus]

20. More accurately you WON'T elaborate.

Because doing so would reflect badly on you.

[Live and Learn]

21. Nope, it would reflect badly on the alerters here that want true censorship. nt

[MrWendel]

26. Figured out...

the First Amendment yet?

[Live and Learn]

31. Figured out that those posts are pretty asinine? nt

[MrWendel]

33. I guess...

you haven't looked up the definition of asinine either.

[LanternWaste]

62. Yours seems a rather self-serving way to rationalize cowering behind implication.

Yours seems a rather self-serving way to rationalize cowering behind implication... but thinking about it, all rationalizations are self-serving.

[Starry Messenger]

10. That's why the right wing attacks voting rights.

If we can restore the VRA, it opens up potential to a progressive agenda for years to come.

[AntiBank]

43. opens it up only if the POTUS helps guide and lead it.

Even though I am voting against Trump by casting my vote for Clinton, colour me extremely sceptical that she will lead any sort of significant progressive agenda when it comes to health care, social security, tertiary educational costs, fracking, foreign policy (humanitarian bombs away!) and reigning in bankster/Wall Street systemic control.

Sorry, I just dont see hardly any, let alone most of those happening to any sort of remotely progressive and significant degrees.

[brentspeak]

11. Hedge fund operators, Wall St. lobbyists, private prison shills, school privatizers

defense contractors, neo-cons, dirty tricks operatives...

That's a lot of diversity, right there.

[SFnomad]

16. Bitter much? n/t

[DemocratSinceBirth]

23. 4/5 of African Americans, 2/3 of Latinos, 2/3 of our glbtq brothers and sisters.

"That's a lot of diversity, right there."

[brentspeak]

34. Did she also win the "making up bogus numbers" vote?

Got a link to your statistics?

[DemocratSinceBirth]

35. "But overall, the math is pretty simple"

Clinton Is Winning The States That Look Like The Democratic Party


But overall, the math is pretty simple. Sanders is winning states that are much whiter than the Democratic electorate as a whole, Clinton is winning states that are much blacker than the Democratic electorate as a whole, and Clinton is winning most of those states that are somewhere in the middle, whether they’re in the South (like Virginia) or elsewhere (like Ohio or Nevada). That’s why she’ll probably be the Democratic nominee.

http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/clinton-is-winning-the-states-that-look-like-the-democratic-party/

California’s most Latino congressional districts broke for Clinton

Those polls, on average, missed an easy Clinton rout in California — and they seem to have missed her resilience with Latino voters. Clinton won all 12 of the California congressional districts where Latino voters make up supermajorities of the population. (Sanders appears to have won just two districts, the largely white and rural 1st and 2nd districts of Northern California.) Both Clinton and Sanders campaigned in the state's most heavily Latino seat, the 40th, which covers east Los Angeles. There, 86.6 percent of the population is Latino, and 55.4 percent of voters broke for Clinton.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2016/06/08/californias-most-latino-congressional-districts-broke-for-clinton/

Hillary Clinton Leads California Among Gay Voters


But there’s one cohort Clinton can count on for support in California: the Golden State’s sizable gay community.

In an informal, non-scientific poll conducted by social app Scruff over the the weekend, Clinton resoundingly defeated Sanders among gay voters, with 59% of respondents saying they intend to vote for her in Tuesday’s primary. Scruff surveyed users residing in California and asked which candidate they intend to support for president. Of the survey’s 1,104 responses, 34% said they were planning to vote for Sanders, and the remaining 7% said they were either not planning to vote or were undecided. In the same survey, Donald Trump received nine votes, and underdog candidates Roque de la Fuente, Jill Stein, and Michael Steinberg garnered one vote each.

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/hillary-clinton-leads-california-among-183529802.html#Aside

Conclusion-

Bernie Sanders' bailiwick was caucuses in homogeneous and sparsely populated states. Out of the ten most populous states he lost nine of them; eight by double digits.

America is not Vermont. I have been saying that since he announced.

Exit polls-

http://www.cnn.com/election/primaries/polls

[DemocratSinceBirth]

38. You picked the wrong poster to bully and disrespect.

Have you making up bull$hit since birth, too?

Here are the exit polls, again:

http://www.cnn.com/election/primaries/polls


Now that we got that housekeeping out of the way... You picked the wrong poster to bully and disrespect.

I don't cower to bullies; online or offline..





P.S. This is a moderated board. It behooves us to treat each other with respect.

[brentspeak]

39. And you still haven't provided any stats to back up your made up numbers

As the CNN link only provides the Latino breakdown (to only those polled) for just a few states. Also doesn't provide any information regarding the gay vote.

If being called out for spouting bull$hit is "being bullied", then Webster-Merriam will have to revise its dictionary.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

41. Please stop using the anonymity of the internet to disrespect people

"Maybe, if it's possible, you've making up bull$hit before birth."

Please stop using the anonymity of the internet to harm and disrespect people. You don't cover yourself in glory when you engage in such untoward behavior.

Thank you in advance.






P.S. This is a moderated board. It behooves us to treat each other with respect.

[LanternWaste]

63. You'll of course link to the poll numbers showing

You'll of course link to the poll numbers showing Wall St. lobbyists, private prison shills, school privatizers, defense contractors, neo-cons, dirty tricks operatives" voted for her more than anyone else, yes?

I'd hate to think you hold others to higher standard than you hold yourself to. Or was your own premise merely flame-bait designed to illustrate your own character more than anything else?

[jamese777]

61. Here's A Link...

http://www.cnn.com/election/primaries/polls

Pick any states that you want to see.
Here's one example:
New York Exit Polls By Race:
White (59% of voters) Sanders: 50%/Clinton: 50%
Black (22% of voters) Sanders: 25%/Clinton: 75%
Latino (14% of Voters) Sanders: 35%/Clinton: 64%

[DemocratSinceBirth]

44. She built a diverse coalition that represents our party. Period.

[peace13]

51. Let me be the first to slap your back!

She was awesome! Everybody loves her. She will make a great president for all. She comes with a spare President too! Can't wait!

[DemocratSinceBirth]

53. Great minds think alike.

[randome]

12. And organized. Sanders didn't even bother to line up Senate support for his candidacy. Duh!

[cali]

15. That is one reason. Certainly not the only reason or the most relevant.

[hack89]

27. Of course it is the most relevant

real people casting real votes is how our system works. Attracting broad support from a broad coalition of voters is extremely relevant. More so than any conspiracy theory about rigged or stolen elections.

[PragmaticLiberal]

29. It isn't the only reason but I think it is the most relevant.

Honestly, this primary (imo) was all about minorities flexing their power.

Hopefully, Hillary won't take that for granted once/if she's in the WH.

[AntiBank]

45. the taken for granted part is baked in the cake

There is no way to spin the simple fact that on multiple foundational issues Clinton's agenda and actual outcomes for the above-mentioned groups will be (whilst better than a Rethug) far less benevolent and beneficial than a truly progressive one along the lines of Sanders or someone similar.

[uponit7771]

47. Sanders decided NOT to compete in states with the most PoC in the DNC primary so ...

... I don't think he though what you posted seeing he didn't want to tell us about it.

Regards

[AntiBank]

48. I am not trying to put Sander's tactics front and centre

I understand exactly how and why Clinton won the minority vote. Bernie had very little chance there. I just think that at base outcomes, progressive economic, educational, health care and foreign policies would have a more positive impact for them vis-a-vis a Clintonian partial or full stop neoliberal one.


excellent article on why Sanders failed with black voters


http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2016/03/why-black-voters-dont-feel-the-bern-213707

[uponit7771]

69. He said he'd fight for every vote but he didn't, I think had he fought for votes from PoC he wouldve

... gotten close instead of losing by double digits.

His message is one of the reasons why PoC didn't feel him; it was aimed at the already economically secure... there's no need to be alarmist at the ones who aren't secured at all ... seeing blacks WITH... WITH a college degree are 2 times more likely to be unemployed.

No amount of economic equality is going to fix that kind of racism without legislation

[joshcryer]

17. She won the core of the party.

While "supporters" of her opponent trashed that core relentlessly.

[w4rma]

19. She knows how to run a smear campaign. (nt)

[blackspade]

25. Yes, very diverse monied interests.

When you have a money machine backing you along with the political classes, you win one way or another.

[rjsquirrel]

54. That

and the majority support of low income voters, women voters, older voters, party leaders, and minorities will generally do it for you, yes!

[jamese777]

57. opensecrets.org

Clinton raises historic share — and amount — of campaign cash from women

Hillary Clinton has raised a higher percentage of her campaign funds from women than any major party presidential candidate in recent history. She’s also raised a higher total in contributions from women than any other candidate at this point in the cycle.
And Donald Trump has the dubious honor of achieving the exact opposite: He has raised less from women than any other major party’s nominee at this point in the presidential cycle since at least 1989 (which is as far back as our data goes). Women have also given his campaign less as a share of total contributions than any White House candidate.
The stark difference between the two presidential front-runners’ fundraising bases highlights the role of gender in a race featuring both the country’s first woman ever to be a major party’s presumed nominee and a celebrity billionaire who repeatedly has made insulting comments about women.
The data refers only to contributions of greater than $200, since campaigns aren’t required to provide to the public details (including names) on donors of smaller amounts.
Still, the race dynamic makes for the largest gender gap in presidential fundraising history. Clinton has raised 53 percent of her campaign’s contributions of more than $200 from women, a Center for Responsive Politics analysis shows, while the comparable figure for Trump is a mere 28 percent. The divide is nearly twice what it was in 2012, when President Barack Obama raised 44 percent of his funds from women versus former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney’s 28 percent.
Clinton has raised $74 million from women who gave more than $200 — almost $10 million more than she’s raised from men in the same category. That’s far more than Trump, who has done little in the way of broad fundraising and has received just $688,640 from women giving more than $200.
https://www.opensecrets.org/news/2016/06/clinton-raises-historic-share-and-amount-of-campaign-cash-from-women/

[Sen. Walter Sobchak]

30. Clinton won the nomination by sucking all the air out of the room

Clinton won the nomination this year by being so insane and irrational in 2008 that any serious Democrat contender with time on their side was going to sit it out and not get in-between Hillary and her perceived birthright leaving only Larry David's surrealist one-man-show as a serious challenger.

[grossproffit]

36. She won by winning.

[Sen. Walter Sobchak]

65. ...a nomination battle that was effectively uncontested.

[rjsquirrel]

55. Otherwise called "winning an election" right?

American presidential politics has never been played by Marquess of Queensbury rules and Hillary has experience at politics Bernie simply didn't have.

That ain't "rigging." That's how politics has always worked in America. Always. We are up against a party willing to use the Supreme Court to install an unelected president and willing to freeze governance rather than accept as legitimate a two term president with two landslide victories.

The election process tests for clever toughness and requires a certain brutal pragmatism. History documentaries aside we have never had an idealist philosopher (not saying Bernie was this by the way) as president. It is always the toughest badass running.

And this time it was a she.

[jamese777]

58. 16.6 million Democratic voters

were smart enough to bring their oxygen masks. 12.8 million other Democratic primary forgot to bring their's.

The popular vote totals in 2008 were:
Barack Obama: 17,584,692
Hillary Clinton: 17,857,501

Barack Obama: 47.3%
Hillary Clinton: 48%

Barack Obama won in pledged and unpledged delegates, but not in popular votes.

[SaschaHM]

60. So I guess Sanders and his supporters are laying the groundwork for a 2024 run with their antics?

[bettyellen]

70. Under the bus with Sanders? That was faster than I thought! Why now?

[Gothmog]

32. Sanders supporters are primarily from a narrow demographic segment of the base

Sanders base was too narrow to get the nomination

[Armstead]

40. She started out this race on Third base.

Clever, deceptive marketing by Camp Clinton, media propaganda and stifling of information, wads of cash, years of building a Political machine....and long time unquestioned loyalties that should have been questioned.

Had there been a more level playing field from the start...I think the results would have been different. She MIGHT have still won, but I think it would have been a lot more mixed.

[rjsquirrel]

56. Name one presidential election in history

Where a candidate did not use all of their advantages?

She got to third base the hard way. One can argue she got to first on a passed ball as First Lady. But she stole second on her own, beat a throw sliding into third, and walked home on a wild pitch.

Plus she the struck out the other side in the bottom of the 9th.

Elections are never fair in any abstract sense because politics is adversarial and high stakes and done by real humans.

[NurseJackie]

42. She's MUCH SMARTER and BETTER PREPARED than any other candidate.

[AntiBank]

46. damning with faint praise

[bigtree]

49. amen

[rjsquirrel]

52. Well stated

This has been my analysis for quite a while as well. I think the democratic primary actually helped Clinton as a GE candidate. The dogfight with the far left (especially in its late wild stages) enhanced her credentials as a centrist who can appeal to normally republican leaning independents and even educated and professional republicans (especially women in the privacy of the voting booth moment) in key swing state districts. She appears to have masteted Obama-style political jujitsu (or learned from bitter experience at his hands in 2008) that having certain kinds of people angry at you in assertive ways can render you more popular with a broader center-left to center-right general electorate and your own diverse base coalition.

So the early analysts who said Sanders would sharpen and toughen and elevate Clinton in a well fought race may have been right.

Of course facing Trump is a wild card no one foresaw a year ago. Right now it looks like a blessing but he just MUST not be underestimated.

[jamese777]

59. I couldn't agree more n/t

[Her Sister]

64. Clinton won the nomination because her coalition is incredibly diverse

this

[jillan]

67. She did not win with voters under the age of 45, plus white working class voters.

She might want to figure that out before the GE.

[bravenak]

68. Obama lost the white vote too.

And I see no reason why we under 45s would ever think about coming out for Trump en masse. Most of us under 45s will vote Hillary. We can win without the white working class. We've done it before. Trump might need to figure out how to win with ONLY the white working class.