Clintonians..... question....

[Leftyforever]

Will you be nervous if Bernie wins Iowa & New Hampshire ?

[Thinkingabout]

1. No, nothing to be nervous, the most delegates from these two staes is less than 100.

Hillary has that number covered with the super delegates.

[JackInGreen]

2. Are you counting on the DNC brokering our convention?

Me thinks them chicken ain't hatched yet.

[Thinkingabout]

29. No, it will not be a brokered convention, Hillary will probably have

Enough delegates by April.

[Leftyforever]

5. Are you in favor of super delegates or do you think at some point we should do away with them?

[Chan790]

11. I've always been in favor of their elimination.

They're fundamentally undemocratic. I also think the DNC chair should be directly elected by rank-and-file Democrats. IF Debbie Downer wants to keep her job, she should have to make the case to the American public of registered Democrats as to why they should keep her.

[Thinkingabout]

33. There are more reasons to keep the super delegates than doing away with them.

This year the super delegates will not have to be added in the count for there to a majority of delegates. It could be possible Sanders would not get enough delegates and having a large number of super delegates would give him the nomination. Would that be okay with you?

[Leftyforever]

49. No not really.. Over the last 10 to 15 years i have become anti-establishment... and i view the

super delegates as super establishment imo

[Thinkingabout]

50. Okay

[Gothmog]

35. Texas has almost three times the number of delegates as Iowa and New Hampshire combined

You do realize that under proportional representation rules that at best Sanders will get a dozen or so more delegates than Clinton from New Hampshire and Iowa while the 15% threshold in states like Texas will hurt Sanders

[Agschmid]

73. I'm in favor of them.

[Wellstone ruled]

8. Pretty much says it all.

Bernie is forcing the Clinton Campaign to the left of center. In order to win the general,the Bernie Supporters will see many of their ideas in the final platform.

[Thinkingabout]

36. Hillary and MOM has pulled Sanders from the right especially on gun issues.

[Wellstone ruled]

57. Sure hope we don't see a single issue

campaign again. I am in the that the so called gun thing is not going to carry the day. Our Nation is so dam tired of the violence and the only people pushing guns are the NRA and their low I.Q.followers. This is nothing more than a wedge item that is distracting us from what is important and that is the Health and Wealth of the American people. Little side bar on guns from a twenty vet of the Vegas Metro,they are so dam tired of the gun crap,when they go on duty,they never know the what were and why the guns.

[The Boss]

42. If Bernie wins IA and NH decisively

I think you would be very nervous. Razor thin, yeah, nothing to worry about. A wider margin, yeah I'd be worried, larger than expected margin the size of Grand Canyon, hit the panic button.

[upaloopa]

3. No IA and NH are all he can win.

No we are not going to be scared of Bernie.

SC is:

67% Hillary

31 % Sanders

2% MOM

No where for Bernie to go.

Most likely it will be the same in NV and Super Tuesday.

[Leftyforever]

10. There is some history ... when a canidate wins both Iowa and New Hampshire... a large bump can

follow...

[Gothmog]

38. Tell that to Nate Silver

[Leftyforever]

40. I think he agrees there is usually a bump... I think he doesn't see at this point Bernie making

substantial in roads with POC vote...

[Gothmog]

51. Without Latino and African American support, Super Tuesday will be a long day for Sanders in Texas

Again, three times the number of delegates as Iowa and New Hampshire combined are up for grabs in Texas

[upaloopa]

58. There is no where for Bernie to get a bump.

Next is SC and he is down 67% to 31% with MOM holding the other 2%. AA's are not going to run to Bernie because he wins in two predominately white states.

[StevieM]

82. Actually, Nevada comes a week before South Carolina, at least on the Democratic side.

For the GOP, Nevada comes three days after SC.

[The Boss]

44. I'd be nervous.

Bernie went from 8% to 30%+ in matter of weeks.

Bernie can get the momentum from NH and IA to spread to SC and NV because what Bernie is bringing is real, not Clinton.

[sufrommich]

4. If he won both I'd be nervous,sure.

I don't think he'll win Iowa and I think he has a chance in New Hampshire.

[Leftyforever]

7. ok... how confident are you hrc will win Iowa... percent chance ?

[sufrommich]

9. I'm pretty confident,I'd say 80% confident. nt

[Leftyforever]

14. ok... wondering if you have factored in that it is a Caucus state and enthusiasm of supporters

plays a huge part... is that factored into your 80% answer ?

[sufrommich]

20. I think the Clinton campaign learned a lesson about caucus states

in 2008,I think she's highly organised there and has been working on that organisation for more than a year.I don't think the Sanders campaign is anywhere near as organised as Obama was in 2008,that's what I'm basing my percentages on.

[Leftyforever]

30. Got ya... wondering what your last point is based on..that Sanders isn't as organized as Obama was

[sufrommich]

53. Obama matched Clinton in spending in Iowa,he was leading in Iowa by

early December even before Oprah campaigned for him there.He also had an advantage with John Edwards making a strong showing in the caucus. This is going to be a choice between two candidates ( no offense to O'Malley supporters) and,as I said,the Obama campaign was incredibly organised,his organization in the 2008 primaries was powered by campaign organisers who were genius in their strategy,Sanders just doesn't have that.

[The Boss]

46. Hillary will lose both states, by a greater-than-expected margin

and it will send out shockwaves.

[applegrove]

6. Nope. It is going to be a long race. I really hope. Both Clinton and Bernie need to be on top of

their game come the general election, whomever wins the nomination.

[Matariki]

47. +1

[hack89]

12. No. Winning South Carolina would make me nervous. Nt

[Leftyforever]

17. How bout if Bernie only loses by 5% in S.C. after winning IA & NH... nervous then ?

[hack89]

18. Somewhat. Very unlikely however. Nt

[The Boss]

48. Clinton is counting on SC as her firewall

Except it will fall, as will Super Tuesday states - to protect her, except she won't a single state.

The momentum will shift heavily after seeing that Bernie is able to win without DNC or M$M's help.

[BlueMTexpat]

69. Well, aren't you the authority?

LOL

[SCantiGOP]

78. If Bernie loses SC by 5% ??

History would be made. He is currently behind 3:1, and best estimates are that he is going to get around 10-15% of the AA vote.
SC is a huge firewall.

[OilemFirchen]

13. Not a Clintonian, but your post begs the question:

If he doesn't, will you be nervous?

[Leftyforever]

15. I'm already nervous

[uponit7771]

16. Unnnn, come to think about it I might like him winning both states... I don't think Sanders ground

... game, outreach and relationship building has been up to par so far so if he won both of those states there would be no 'name recognition' excuse for losing the rest of the states.

[Leftyforever]

19. Interesting... I disagree though... I think his ground game & outreach has been his strength..

[uponit7771]

22. We'll see, it sounds like he is just getting started in the south and also with delegates he's ...

... running way behind

[Leftyforever]

24. Yes.. the delegates are a problem..... super delegates more than the reg. delegates

[Thinkingabout]

41. They get one vote at the convention.

[cwydro]

55. He'll never get the south.

Won't happen.

[workinclasszero]

84. That's for damn sure

IMO

[MoonRiver]

21. I would be amazed but not nervous.

[Leftyforever]

27. I assume you mean you would be amazed if he won IA.. NH wouldn't be a surprise right ?

[MoonRiver]

67. That's correct.

[JoePhilly]

23. Why? If he can convience enough ...

... folks to switch to him, he deserves to win.

I think the reality is that for him to have ANY chance whatsoever, he had to win both of those states.

If he loses either, I doubt he can capture many more.

[Leftyforever]

25. I think I agree with your first point... Bernie needs to win both to win...

[JaneyVee]

26. Not the first 2, but the next 3 after? Sure.

[Leftyforever]

28. If Bernie won IA & NH you wouldn't be nervous as long as hrc won SC & NV ?? How bout if Bernie won

NV but not SC

[JaneyVee]

32. IA and NH are homogeneous states whose...

Demographics look nothing like the Democratic party i.e. both states are over 95% white. If he starts leading in states that reflect Dem party demographics more accurately then he'll probably win. I wouldn't call it nervous because at the end of the day the goal is to beat the Republicans. I would be nervous that Bernie's incompetent campaign staff would not be able to deliver our party an electoral victory.

[Gothmog]

31. The Demographics of Iowas and New Hampshire are NOR the same as the rest of the democratic base

Last edited Sun Dec 20, 2015, 09:00 PM - Edit history (1)

Demographics are the key and Sanders is not doing well in states that have less than 90% white voting populations. Nate Silver looked at the demographics issue and concluded that victories by Sanders in Iowa and New Hampshire are meaningless http://fivethirtyeight.com/datalab/bernie-sanders-new-hampshire/

And guess what? They sorta have a point. Although his gains may not be as great as before, polls in August showed Sanders continuing to pick up support in New Hampshire (the situation in Iowa is less clear). But the fundamentals of the race haven’t changed very much. In particular, Sanders has shown little sign of winning over votes from African-Americans or Hispanics, which would limit his growth as the race moves on to more racially diverse states.....

So why do I still think Sanders is a factional candidate? He hasn’t made any inroads with non-white voters — in particular black voters, a crucial wing of the Democratic coalition and whose support was a big part of President Obama’s toppling of Clinton in the 2008 primary. Not only are African-Americans the majority of Democratic voters in the South Carolina primary (a crucial early contest), they make up somewhere between 19 percent and 24 percent of Democrats nationwide. In the past two YouGov polls, Sanders has averaged just 5 percent with black voters. Ipsos’s weekly tracking poll has him at an average of only 7 percent over the past two weeks. Fox News (the only live-interview pollster to publish results among non-white voters in July and August) had Clinton leading Sanders 62-10 among non-white Democrats in mid-July and 65-14 in mid-August. Clinton’s edge with non-whites held even as Sanders cut her overall lead from 40 percentage points to 19....

But even if you put aside those metrics, Sanders is running into the problem that other insurgent Democrats have in past election cycles. You can win Iowa relying mostly on white liberals. You can win New Hampshire. But as Gary Hart and Bill Bradley learned, you can’t win a Democratic nomination without substantial support from African-Americans.

Again, victories by Sanders in Iowa and New Hampshire do not worry Nate and do not worry me

[Leftyforever]

37. Do you think Obama will endorse hrc or Bernie ? Do you think hrc has the POC vote locked up ??

[Gothmog]

45. Sanders has a problem getting African American votes because he is not viable in general election

I keep asking how Sanders is viable in a general election campaign where the Kochs will be spending $887 million and the GOP candidate will be spending another billion dollars and the answers that I keep getting are not satisfactory. You are welcome to ignore political reality and the traditional concepts of politics and campaign but do not expect others to accept your claims without proof.

Sanders is not going to appeal to voters in key demographic blocks without some real evidence of viability. For example, African American voters are concerned about electability http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/politics/2015/09/bernie_sanders_presidential_campaign_what_would_it_take_for_the_vermont.html

. For as much as black Americans might like his policy positions—which fit their enthusiasm for a stronger safety net—they’re also strategic voters, not ideological stalwarts. Electability is key, and as a consequence, they tend to back the establishment choice: Al Gore over Bill Bradley; John Kerry over John Edwards. On occasion, blacks will back a factional candidate, like Jesse Jackson in 1984 and 1988. But Jackson had the reverse problem—he couldn’t win enough whites.

Again, Sanders would have a stronger campaign if someone could provide a good explanation as to viability

[Leftyforever]

52. I think the state heads up vs repub polls show Bernie to be very electable... i believe even more

so than hrc.. right ?

[Gothmog]

63. Those polls are meaningless unless the candidate is able to run a viable campaign

Sanders will not be able to run a viable campaign and is very vulnerable to negative ads. The terms socialism and socialist poll very very badly. In the real world, real campaigns and real political operations conduct something that is called polling. Polling helps real campaigns refine their message and avoid traps. I know that the Sanders campaign considers polling to be a waste of time and money which worries me as to whether Sanders is a viable candidate. DWS is well aware of this polling
.
From Pew http://www.pewresearch.org/daily-number/little-change-in-publics-response-to-capitalism-socialism/

The word ‘socialism’ triggers a negative reaction for most Americans, but certainly not for all. Six-in-ten (60%) people say they have a negative reaction to the word, while just 31% have a positive reaction. Those numbers are little changed from April 2010....

By contrast, socialism is a far more divisive word, with wide differences of opinion along racial, generational, socioeconomic and political lines. Fully nine-in-ten conservative Republicans (90%) view socialism negatively, while nearly six-in-ten liberal Democrats (59%) react positively. Low-income Americans are twice as likely as higher-income Americans to offer a positive assessment of socialism (43% among those with incomes under $30,000, 22% among those earning $75,000 or more).

From Gallop http://www.gallup.com/poll/125645/Socialism-Viewed-Positively-Americans.aspx

PRINCETON, NJ -- More than one-third of Americans (36%) have a positive image of "socialism," while 58% have a negative image. Views differ by party and ideology, with a majority of Democrats and liberals saying they have a positive view of socialism, compared to a minority of Republicans and conservatives.



....Socialism

Socialism had the lowest percentage positive rating and the highest negative rating of any term tested. Still, more than a third of Americans say they have a positive image of socialism.

Exactly how Americans define "socialism" or what exactly they think of when they hear the word is not known. The research simply measures Americans' reactions when a survey interviewer reads the word to them -- an exercise that helps shed light on connotations associated with this frequently used term.

There are significant differences in reactions to "socialism" across ideological and partisan groups:

A majority of 53% of Democrats have a positive image of socialism, compared to 17% of Republicans.
Sixty-one percent of liberals say their image of socialism is positive, compared to 39% of moderates and 20% of conservatives

This fits into the old proverb, if you can not say something nice, then do not answer the question. DWS gave the only practical and real world answer that she could be not discussing the terms socialism and socialist

[Kentonio]

100. That polling is from 2010 and 2011.

[The Boss]

54. Neither is Clinton

She has no crossover appeal, and the most she can get is about 30-35% of the total population to vote.

Bernie, on the other hand, has HUGE crossover appeal and should be considered as a excellent GE candidate.

[Gothmog]

61. Sanders is bringing a knife to a gunfight

Some candidates are better able to raise the funds necessary to complete. President Obama blew everyone away in 2008 with his small donor fundraising efforts and that made it clear that he was electable. Jeb is trying to do the same on the GOP side with his $100 million super pac.

There are many on this board who doubt that Sanders will be able to compete in a general election contest where the Kochs will be spending $887 million and the RNC candidate will likely spend another billion. This article had a very interesting quote about the role of super pacs in the upcoming election http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/jul/03/bernie-sanders-grassroots-movement-gains-clinton-machine

Harvard University professor Lawrence Lessig, who founded a Super Pac to end Super Pacs, said Sanders’ renouncing Super Pacs is tantamount to “bringing a knife to a gunfight”.

“I regret the fact the Bernie Sanders has embraced the idea that he’s going to live life like the Vermont snow, as pure as he possibly can, while he runs for president, because it weakens his chances – and he’s an enormously important progressive voice,” Lessig said.

President Obama was against super pacs in 2012 but had to use one to keep the race close. I do not like super pacs but any Democratic candidate who wants to be viable has to use a super pac

[The Boss]

79. Koch has $883m spending? Really?

They aren't going to spend on morons. Their buttboy, Walker, dropped out, and the craziest hasn't interested Kochs. So, I think they're going to sit it out again, and hopefully this is their final election before their ultimate fate.

[Gothmog]

81. The Kochs will do spend a great deal to keep a socialist from becoming POTUS

I have no doubt that the Kochs will be spending a great deal of money this cycle

[Leftyforever]

96. True that... is it me or are we slipping slowly into a fascist oligarchy ??

[Leftyforever]

97. I have to agree...

[Leftyforever]

98. Any chance Obama would endorse him ??

[Gothmog]

102. I imagine the President Obama will endorse the nominee

[Leftyforever]

106. You are almost definitely correct... would it be a game changer if he endorsed Bernie though??

[Gothmog]

111. That is not going to happen

President Obama is not going to endorse anyone prior to the nomination being assured. The only possible exception to this was Biden which is why the Clinton numbers shot up after Biden made it official that he was not running.

You can hope for this but I would not hold my breath

[reformist2]

62. If Sanders can get over 30% of African-American vote, that will be enough to take the nomination.

[Gothmog]

66. How does the math on this works?

I have not seen this explanation and I am not sure if the math works.

[Leftyforever]

95. any chance Obama could throw some wait behind the progressive wing of our party and endorse Bernie

[Hoyt]

34. Nope. If Sanders can win the primaries legitimately, he has a chance.

Don't think he will win, but folks will support him if he does even of it ends like George McGovern.

[Bryan]

39. No. I'm mentally prepared for her to lose Iowa and New Hampshire.

Nevada and South Carolina follow shortly after, and Sec'y Clinton has a large lead in the one and a massive lead in the other.

Besides, I'm not really nervous about the (unlikely) prospect of a Sanders victory; if he runs the table on Super Tuesday and becomes the frontrunner, then he will have proven to be the stronger candidate. I'm voting for the Democratic nominee, be it Clinton, Sanders, Zombie Adlai Stevenson, or a bottle of Orange Fanta with a face drawn on it.

[Leftyforever]

43. Nice.... I can't find a lot of recent polling in NV... do you have any ?

[Bryan]

74. I was going off of the admittedly meager RCP average

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/nv/nevada_democratic_presidential_caucus-5337.html

Those polls are old enough to have Biden in them, but they show a clear lead.

[Leftyforever]

94. yeah.. they were the only ones I could find too... hope we get some new numbers soon...

[uponit7771]

56. +1

[Lil Missy]

59. Not at all.

[Leftyforever]

93. Right on... so no game changing bump for Bernie if he wins IA & NH

[cali]

60. Here's why you should be: Not of losing the nomination but brecause

It will weaken her in the general and don't think it won't.That will become one of the major themes. Not a good thing.

[Leftyforever]

92. I get what you are saying but I have to fight to get Bernie elected.. he's special... plus ..I

could be wrong but this republican field is supremely weak..clown car level... don't think they can win a national election for a while... unless a super unforseeable upside down thing were to happen

[Agnosticsherbet]

64. I will vote for Clinton in the primary, but we have three good candidates.

Your question doesn't make sense to me. I do not have faith in the one perfect candidate.

[Leftyforever]

91. ok got ya.. nervous you will not be no matter which way the votes fall...understand..you are lucky

[Agnosticsherbet]

103. We elect representatives, not glorious leaders or charismatic revolutionaries.

Personal loyalty or faith in the person running for office is dangerous in a representative democracy.

No matter what ridiculous things are said by partisans for a person, politically they are pretty close, well to the left of the political center in the US. Anyone of them is qualified for the job.

[Leftyforever]

107. I personally don't use faith... Loyalty to proven otherwise...

[seabeyond]

65. No. I do not think he will win Iowa, firstly. I think Clinton

will have an easy win of the primaries. If Sanders pulls a defeat, then I will work with getting him elected president.

I do not want a Republican in office.

I stopped getting emotional over elections back in 2004. Or nervous, as you put it. What happens, happens, and we live with it.

[Leftyforever]

90. Thanks... I still get a little emotional....cause if only George W. wouldn't have been gifted the

presidency by that fair and impartial supreme court of ours.... ugh... still fires me up... and now I feel the Bern

[BlueMTexpat]

68. Please do not call supporters of Hillary Clinton

"Clintonians." I would welcome you to DU, but that tone makes me wary.

No, I will not be "nervous" at all, whatever happens in IA and/or NH. I doubt that Bernie will win in Iowa, but it's possible. Caucuses are strange critters. I will be surprised if he doesn't win in NH.

After that, though, it's pretty much a sweep for Hillary based on the polls and I doubt they will swing significantly away from her no matter what happens in IA and NH.

Failing a miracle for Bernie, that is. I suppose, strictly speaking, that miracles are possible, but they are very, very rare indeed.

Bernie Sanders is no Barack Obama. Period.

[Leftyforever]

89. You sure have solid confident opinions...

I think i will keep using "Clintonians". It's not meant to be disrespectful but it does subtly convey what I think she represents in our government/world today. I think Iowa is close and with an excited passionate electorate for Bernie...well it might just give him the edge.. gonna be close I think. I am not as sure as you are that wins in IA & NH won't translate into significant bumps in some other States particularly NV. S.C. is pretty much in the bag for hrc.. unless Obama weighs in with an endorsement before the S.C. primary. I have no reason to think that might happen...but maybe Obama is the Progressive we thought he was before he took office. Just some fun conjecture. And finally....again no disrespect but I don't think miracles happen.. Happy Holidays.. peace to you and yours

[BlueMTexpat]

99. Well, it may not be disrespectful

in your opinion and I appreciate your generally courteous reply.

But when someone specifically requests that you not use the term and you yourself admit that you want to "subtly convey" what you think Hillary represents (which is what exactly - "-ian" as in "Smithsonian" - which could be considered a compliment?) and you choose to ignore the specific request, that is, at the least, not courteous, IMO. It implies that you also have some subtle conveyance about her supporters, whatever that conveyance may be.

Why on earth do you believe that Hillary's supporters are any less excited and passionate than Bernie's are? Or than MO'M's are?

You are certainly not alone among Bernie supporters here in believing that Bernie's supporters are somehow unique. But I believe that you all underestimate both qualities among supporters of other candidates. You may also want to add the adjectives "staunch" and "dedicated" and "determined" etc. to describe supporters of other candidates because we are all of those as well.

In any event, please do enjoy your conjectures and your holidays!

[Leftyforever]

104. We will have to agree to disagree on your first paragraphs topic. As far as the rest of your reply.

I am basing my enthusiastic meter when it comes to the different campaigns on crowd size and number of individual contributions. Also in the context that hrc has been a household name for 23 years now... I don't think there is a credible argument based on metrics that say hrc's supporters are more passionate than Bernie's...

[onehandle]

70. Cool story, namecaller. nt

[ismnotwasm]

71. Nope

I expect him to win one if not both.

[Leftyforever]

88. if he wins both how much does the race tighten up ?

[Agschmid]

72. Iowa yes, NH no.

ETA: "Nervous" isn't the right term, we have great candidates I'd vote for any of the three in the GE.

[Leftyforever]

87. got ya... makes sense

[Scootaloo]

75. Why would they be nervous?

I mean they keep assuring us that they like bernie, that he's a good progressive, and all of that. So. Why on earth would they be nervous if he pulled ahead?

[firebrand80]

76. Yes

I wouldn't feel good about it, that's for sure.

It would give his campaign a significant among of energy and a lot of voters would take a second look at him. The media would start with a "It's happening to her again" narrative.

I don't think it would win him the nomination, because Hillary isn't repeating her mistakes, she's well organized in the Super Tuesday states and beyond.

That said, I like Bernie and will support him whole-heartedly if he were the nominee.

[dlwickham]

77. no

will the bern bots be nervous is Hillary wins both states?

[NCTraveler]

80. Yes. I'm nervous now.

That doesn't mean I don't feel Clinton has it in the bag. It's just too difficult to make a solid guess in Iowa. It appears at this point that Sanders isn't all that prepared to move on after Iowa.

[Leftyforever]

85. ok... you are the 2nd hrc supporter who thinks Bernie isn't prepared to move on after IA & NH ...

what makes you think this way ?

[NCTraveler]

101. Please see his National Data Director.

They simply have no management or control. His response to this has been laughable at best. He hasn't surrounded himself with the people necessary.

[Leftyforever]

105. Well... you are exaggerating just a bit here... I appreciate your loyalty and enthusiasm... first

none of us know exactly what took place with the NDD... 2nd to take 1 single member of his team and use it to judge the rest of his team is not credible... interesting fact Bernie just passed Obama on contribution amount....

[NCTraveler]

108. I have loyalty to no politician.

"interesting fact Bernie just passed Obama on contribution amount.... "

Some changes would need to be made to that sentence to make it a fact. I do understand the great need to try to connect him to someone like Obama. Thanks.

[workinclasszero]

83. No because Hillary will destroy Bernie

In the south. How many delagates would Bernie get out of Iowa and NH?

I'm not sure but I bet SC alone will top both of them together.

It's all over for Bernie after super tuesday.

[Leftyforever]

86. I think the question is trying to get to the point that if Bernie wins IA & NH what sort of bump/

boost will he get and could be a catapult to more wins... and as Clinton supporters... the question is would you then be nervous....

[Codeine]

109. If I'm being honest then sure, I'd be a bit nervous.

But I'm fairly confident she'd pull ahead when we get into states with a more diverse population. I'd love to see her sweep the whole shebang but Sanders is sitting on a big NH lead and can make things close enough in Iowa that his undercounted youth vote could tip it.

But even still, the worst that can happen is we have a different - but still great - candidate for president. I'm very pleased with the whole field.

[Leftyforever]

110. Thanks for the honesty... much appreciated