Democratic Primaries

ehrnst

(32,640 posts)

57. You skipped this part... she got that "raw" number despite...

Thu Jan 30, 2020, 10:41 PM

Jan 2020

Russian interference,
misogyny on the right and left,
the statistical improbability of a party keeping the WH for more than two consecutive terms,
and targeted voter suppression of Democratic voters in the key three swing states where she lost by a sliver of a percent...

So yeah, that and was pretty damned impressive, however much you want to try to dismiss the reality of what she accomplished.

You're welcome.

"Means absolutely nothing.." because she lost three key states by a sliver...and did better than any candidate not named Obama. If it "meant absolutely nothing," why do Trump and the GOP harp on how she "cheated?'

Math doesn't know "raw," honey. It just is or it isn't. I don't recall anyone dismissing Obama's numbers at the polls as simply "turnout and raw numbers"

That resentment of HRC's actual vote tally win sounds familiar...

Are you sure you're on the right board?

If I were to vote in a presidential
primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

62 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

It is beyond strange that people think 1972 is a better predictor of 2020 than 2016 [View all] markpkessinger Jan 2020 OP

Thank you, sir!! Tiggeroshii Jan 2020 #1

Good point RandySF Jan 2020 #2

Centrists? The Valley Below Jan 2020 #3

And McGovern met your standard by any measwure . . . markpkessinger Jan 2020 #7

We had a populist running "as a Democrat" in 1972. The Valley Below Jan 2020 #9

If Bernie is a "populist," then so was FDR markpkessinger Jan 2020 #14

Centrist has become an epithet, apparently. And you seem to define it a any Democrat not ehrnst Jan 2020 #29

FDR was a certified member of the privileged power elite. Hortensis Jan 2020 #53

You fail to examine the specific comparisons made LanternWaste Jan 2020 #32

You're right. The country is different now calguy Jan 2020 #52

Centrist Go Vols Jan 2020 #36

And long since, the Democratic Party is PROVEN to have returned Hortensis Jan 2020 #54

ok... how many Bernie backed candidates in contested areas lapfog_1 Jan 2020 #4

I'll do Democratic Congressional & Senatorial Campaign Committees as a benchmark. Scurrilous Jan 2020 #6

Do you mean 2018 when we had the BLUE WAVE House Cha Jan 2020 #11

yes, typo - 2018 lapfog_1 Jan 2020 #18

Any analysis of 2016 that ignores Russia is naive at best. delisen Jan 2020 #5

any analysis of 2020 that ignores russia is the same. mopinko Jan 2020 #35

LOL @ 'anti-establishment fervor was running at a high' after 8 years of Obama. Scurrilous Jan 2020 #8

I wonder if some people were alive in 1972? The Valley Below Jan 2020 #10

"Hey, hey, ACA! How many kids did you kill today?" Scurrilous Jan 2020 #17

The "centrists" who WON the BLUE WAVE House Victory in 2018! Cha Jan 2020 #12

Yep! BS did think that he would be the one having the most influence in the 2018 blue wave. ehrnst Jan 2020 #25

Yes, it was Nancy Pelosi advising to campaign on ACA who help immensely Cha Jan 2020 #38

Speaker Pelosi will be treated better by history than she is now. See also: ehrnst Jan 2020 #49

I don't think it'll be like 1972... Drunken Irishman Jan 2020 #13

I grew up in Pennsylvania . . . markpkessinger Jan 2020 #15

Again, it's the margins. Drunken Irishman Jan 2020 #16

Following the logic of your own post . . . markpkessinger Jan 2020 #45

Moderates didn't go for Hillary by near the margin they did Obama... Drunken Irishman Jan 2020 #60

A self described Socialist.. and not a uniter like Joe Biden.. Cha Jan 2020 #19

It remains to be seen whether Biden will be any more of uniter than anyone else n/t markpkessinger Jan 2020 #44

I keep reading fantasies about a brokered convention tirebiter Jan 2020 #20

Maybe you have a point on 1972 Hav Jan 2020 #21

Post removed Post removed Jan 2020 #28

No artument with . . . markpkessinger Jan 2020 #42

'Those" Actual Democrats... you write that as though you're not one. ehrnst Jan 2020 #58

No argument with the systemic problems of the electoral college . .. markpkessinger Jan 2020 #43

Yes, she got more votes than anyone not named Obama... ehrnst Jan 2020 #50

The raw number of votes was a result of turnout and a larger electorate markpkessinger Jan 2020 #56

You skipped this part... she got that "raw" number despite... ehrnst Jan 2020 #57

What other candidate was up against Russia, the FBI director and misogyny... ehrnst Jan 2020 #59

If it's status quo repairman vs gonna fuck shit up Voltaire2 Jan 2020 #22

"Win again?" Who is the "gonna fuck shit up" in your metaphor? ehrnst Jan 2020 #24

Who thinks this? ehrnst Jan 2020 #23

Have you read some of the responses to this thread?; n/t markpkessinger Jan 2020 #39

Are you saying that the OP predicted that in advance of posting.... ehrnst Jan 2020 #48

Yes, including one of yours that's gone missing. Hillary's approval Hortensis Jan 2020 #55

Amen. Nanjeanne Jan 2020 #26

1972 was prosperity & propaganda "better dead than red" Prosper Jan 2020 #27

How about Britain 2019 then? dsc Jan 2020 #30

I am not convinced British politics are necessarily a good barometer of U.S. politics n/t markpkessinger Jan 2020 #40

we didn't hear that. Voltaire2 Jan 2020 #41

It is beyond strange that people think 2016 is a better predictor of 2020 than 2018 brooklynite Jan 2020 #31

A midterm is a different animal from a presidential election n/t markpkessinger Jan 2020 #47

Message auto-removed Name removed Jan 2020 #33

The 2020 election will be won or lost in the suburbs. DemocratSinceBirth Jan 2020 #34

Marshall Matz, who was a policy adviser for Sen. George McGovern's failed 1972 bid is worried Gothmog Jan 2020 #37

2016 The Revolution Jan 2020 #46

but not quite as strange as people believing that the 1930s are a better predictor Fresh_Start Jan 2020 #51

Spot on. BlueWI Jan 2020 #61

Kicked and recommended. Uncle Joe Jan 2020 #62