To get a little perspective on primary results

[PatSeg]

Democratic Primary Results From the First 13 States in 1992

Iowa - Tom Harkin

New Hampshire - Paul Tsongas

Maine - Jerry Brown

South Dakota - Bob Kerrey

Colorado _ Jerry Brown

Georgia - Bill Clinton

Idaho - Tom Harkin

Maryland - Tom Harkin

Utah - Paul Tsongas

Washington - Paul Tsongas

Arizona - Paul Tsongas

South Carolina - Bill Clinton

We still have a long way to go!

[Cha]

1. Yes We Do.. Big Picture, Peeps.

Thanks, Pat

[PatSeg]

4. You're welcome

The mainstream media makes it sound like the die has been cast after one caucus.

[Cha]

9. Of course they do m$m is Not even a one trick pony

[Scurrilous]

2. In 1972 Florida had the 2nd primary.

George Wallace won! *gulp* So much for national bellwether.

[peggysue2]

3. Hang tight, Joe!

Despite the new round of obituaries, your round is coming and your supporters are still here. I'll cast my vote in the Super Tuesday primary (for Joe, of course), then we'll see how the landscape tilts.

[PatSeg]

5. I keep encountering more and more

solid Biden supporters and the endorsements are very impressive, but the media is ready to read Biden's last rites.

[Green Line]

14. The media has trashed Joe since he announced

I’ve stopped watching MSNBC, they’ve been the worse.

[PatSeg]

15. I still watch MSNBC for other news

but I'm avoiding their primary coverage. A lot of hot air most of the time, talking to fill space. When it is over, most people won't remember what they said, but the majority of it will have been wrong.

[W_HAMILTON]

6. Until South Carolina votes, pundits are just earning their paycheck by filling airtime...

...with their prognostications.

If Biden wins strongly in South Carolina, he probably enters Super Tuesday with the delegate lead (as was always predicted) and all this handwringing about his campaign between Iowa and then will have been all for naught.

If Biden loses South Carolina, then the conventional wisdom about his campaign is thrown out the window and then it will probably be a real dog fight for the nomination.

[PatSeg]

7. Yes, that is how it appears

but I guess that doesn't make very compelling campaign coverage.

[Garrett78]

8. That's misleading.

IA was essentially nullified due to there being an Iowan in the race. And Clinton was propelled forward precisely because of his very strong showing in NH (remember, Tsongas was from nearby MA) and the resulting "comeback kid" narrative.

Georgia was the biggest prize of that mini-Super Tuesday. In Maryland, Clinton once again finished a very strong 2nd behind Tsongas (not Harkin). Tsongas left the race in mid-March.

Clinton was finishing top 3 in nearly every contest leading up to Super Tuesday.

[Demsrule86]

10. Clinton lost New Hampshire and neither state really matter unless we believe it does and I don't.

Biden got 8 delegates less than Sanders.

[Garrett78]

11. You can believe whatever you want. History doesn't care what you believe.

Clinton is the only person from either party who won the nomination without winning either IA or NH. That's the lone exception that proves the rule. And, as I keep explaining, Clinton in '92 isn't really much of an exception (because Iowa was basically nullified that year and because it was precisely how well Clinton did in NH that propelled him forward).

Those pointing to '92 as evidence that Biden isn't in trouble are accomplishing the exact opposite of what they intend to accomplish.

[Celerity]

16. No Democratic candidate in the almost 200 year history of the party has won the presidency

after running before and losing in the primaries of a previous election or elections or without being POTUS already, like LBJ did in 1964.

[Kentonio]

17. Bingo

These attempts to make it sound like Iowa and NH are somehow irrevant are ridiculous and fly in the face of decades of political history.

If you crash and burn in both Iowa and New Hampshire you’re extremely likely to be done as a realistic candidate.

[ehrnst]

18. Like Bill Clinton? (nt)

[question everything]

12. Was this the order that the states voted?

[PatSeg]

13. Yes

There's a more detailed chart at Wikipedia, rather interesting.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1992_Democratic_Party_presidential_primaries

[Tom Rinaldo]

19. So much else has changed in 28 years, gaining perspective from then is dubious

We used to routinely have brokered conventions once also. Of course this may be the year when we do again.

[PatSeg]

21. Obviously this isn't like 1992

but it is also shortsighted to compare this primary season to 2004 or 2008. Very little about what we are experiencing today is typical, so I don't expect the outcome of this primary to be typical.

[Tom Rinaldo]

22. We have consensus,lol n/t

[PatSeg]

23. We need to find common ground

wherever possible!

[Act_of_Reparation]

20. Well, shit.

107 Democratic primaries since they started in 1912, but Clinton won one 27 years ago so we're fine folks nothing to see here move along move along move along.