HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » Latest Breaking News (Forum) » Democrats debate Biden ef...

Tue Jun 30, 2020, 08:02 AM

Democrats debate Biden effort to expand map against Trump

This discussion thread was locked as off-topic by JudyM (a host of the Latest Breaking News forum).

Source: The Hill

Democrats say Joe Biden’s campaign should go big and expand the map to try to give the former vice president several paths to 270 electoral votes and the possibility of a landslide victory over President Trump.

“We’re running against a guy who cares deeply about size and numbers,” said one Democratic strategist. “The best way to tell him to go home is with a resounding defeat…That’s the only language he understands.”

Another Democratic strategist Joel Payne, put it this way: “You don’t want a squeaker if nothing else because you want a government mandate.”

A number of recent polls have indicated Biden has a healthy, double-digit national lead over Trump, and several of the surveys have also pointed to close races in states such as Texas and Georgia, where Republican presidential candidates in recent years have been confident of victory.

Read more: https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/505114-democrats-debate-biden-effort-to-expand-map-against-trump



Yes, but...

Clinton lost because her team focused on expanding the election map WITHOUT first locking down her base voters (assuming that Obama voters would automatically vote for her without persuasion.

Biden has the opportunity to expand his EV margin as long as he balances that effort with locking down the old school battleground (rust belt) States.

39 replies, 1609 views

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 39 replies Author Time Post
Reply Democrats debate Biden effort to expand map against Trump (Original post)
brooklynite Jun 30 OP
IronLionZion Jun 30 #1
betsuni Jun 30 #2
brooklynite Jun 30 #5
betsuni Jun 30 #8
brooklynite Jun 30 #13
betsuni Jun 30 #14
brooklynite Jun 30 #16
MrsCoffee Jun 30 #17
betsuni Jun 30 #22
lapucelle Jun 30 #25
betsuni Jun 30 #26
lapucelle Jun 30 #27
betsuni Jun 30 #28
lapucelle Jun 30 #29
brooklynite Jun 30 #33
brooklynite Jun 30 #34
lapucelle Jun 30 #35
brooklynite Jun 30 #37
lapucelle Jun 30 #38
bucolic_frolic Jun 30 #6
bucolic_frolic Jun 30 #3
groundloop Jun 30 #4
brooklynite Jun 30 #7
MrsCoffee Jun 30 #19
betsuni Jun 30 #9
George II Jun 30 #10
JI7 Jun 30 #11
BigmanPigman Jun 30 #18
Me. Jun 30 #23
mcar Jun 30 #24
George II Jun 30 #31
mcar Jun 30 #32
Steelrolled Jun 30 #12
beachbumbob Jun 30 #15
ucrdem Jun 30 #20
Gore1FL Jun 30 #21
unblock Jun 30 #30
ucrdem Jun 30 #36
JudyM Jun 30 #39

Response to brooklynite (Original post)

Tue Jun 30, 2020, 08:05 AM

1. Biden is probably using a lot of Obama's campaign staff

so they probably know the deal. I bet it shocked a lot of experts when Obama expanded the map after the previous 2 elections.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brooklynite (Original post)

Tue Jun 30, 2020, 08:27 AM

2. "Clinton lost because her team focused on expanding the election map WITHOUT first

locking down her base voters."

What does that mean?

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to betsuni (Reply #2)

Tue Jun 30, 2020, 08:36 AM

5. Obama won PA-OH-MI-WI...

Clinton assumed that they would automatically vote for her and didn't aggressively campaign there. Obama did micro targeting of voters and identified the best persuasion advocates for each. Clinton didn't. Instead, they focused on Georgia and Arizona at a point before they were ready to flip. (I've had several State Party Chairs tell me the same story).

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brooklynite (Reply #5)

Tue Jun 30, 2020, 08:56 AM

8. How do you know she assumed anything?

The economy was terrible in 2008, wasn't in 2016. She knew all the crap she was up against.

"Candidate appearances in towns or counties often have small and temporary effects on polls numbers -- and thus an uncertain impact on vote share. ... Critics faulted Clinton for eschewing tactics that her campaign's senior staff believed would be ineffective and inefficient. But these tactics really are often ineffective and inefficient. Multiple experiments show that face-to-face contact has little persuasive effect in presidential general elections. ... Indeed, face-to-face persuasion can even backfire. One study of the 2008 Obama campaign -- which was routinely praised for the efficiency of its field organization -- found that a face-to-face experiment in Wisconsin may have reduced support for for Obama."

From "Identity Crisis."

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to betsuni (Reply #8)

Tue Jun 30, 2020, 09:15 AM

13. Because I know people who worked on the campaign...

I had senior staff from her campaign staying in my house. i get my information from people in the real world, not internet speculation.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brooklynite (Reply #13)

Tue Jun 30, 2020, 09:18 AM

14. I'll trust research and data over "some people say."

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to betsuni (Reply #14)

Tue Jun 30, 2020, 09:45 AM

16. "Some people" include the Party Chair of Ohio...

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brooklynite (Reply #16)


Response to brooklynite (Reply #16)

Tue Jun 30, 2020, 09:57 AM

22. Oh, that sounds like the dreaded Establishment!

Though a party chair seems fun.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to betsuni (Reply #14)

Tue Jun 30, 2020, 10:30 AM

25. I'm a NYer worked the ground game in PA weekends in September and October.

We took nothing for granted.


Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to lapucelle (Reply #25)

Tue Jun 30, 2020, 10:38 AM

26. Yes, no Democrat does.

To say otherwise is ridiculous.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to betsuni (Reply #26)

Tue Jun 30, 2020, 10:43 AM

27. We were sent there by the NY chair. N/T

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to lapucelle (Reply #27)

Tue Jun 30, 2020, 10:44 AM

28. But was it a party chair?

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink



Response to lapucelle (Reply #25)

Tue Jun 30, 2020, 12:36 PM

33. I was working in Cleveland the week before Election day...

After returning my first street list (which was not scrubbed), I was told I should take the afternoon off and go sightseeing.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to lapucelle (Reply #25)

Tue Jun 30, 2020, 12:37 PM

34. 538: "The Clinton Campaign Seems To Think Pennsylvania Is In The Bag"

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-clinton-campaign-seems-to-think-pennsylvania-is-in-the-bag/

Hillary Clinton has a substantial lead in the polls over Donald Trump, and has vastly more cash on hand. But when it comes to spending that cash, her campaign may be making a strategic miscalculation. The campaign and an allied super PAC have reserved $137 million of ads across eight states — yet they’ve conspicuously left out the state that might be likeliest to tip the 2016 election: Pennsylvania.

Michigan and Wisconsin were absent from the list, as well, but the Keystone State is the most curious Rust Belt omission. In May, we laid out the case for why the Keystone State could be on pace to decide a close national race. Evidently, Democratic ad strategists don’t share that view. Last week, former Obama advisor David Plouffe tweeted that the buy “shows real discipline” because “PA is not a true battleground.” That’s a bit of bravado, considering it was tied for Obama’s fourth-closest win in 2012.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brooklynite (Reply #34)

Tue Jun 30, 2020, 12:44 PM

35. An opinion piece from June 2016 vs my lived experience in September-October 2016. N/T

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to lapucelle (Reply #35)

Tue Jun 30, 2020, 01:34 PM

37. My lived experience and the political pros I've talked to think differently.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brooklynite (Reply #37)

Tue Jun 30, 2020, 01:47 PM

38. My lived experience was in PA. N/T

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to betsuni (Reply #2)

Tue Jun 30, 2020, 08:37 AM

6. I think that means MI PA WI

HRC was a great candidate, with a great resume. She would have been a fine President. I think gender stereotypes and differences hurt her against Trump in particular, in ways we're still not recognizing or understanding. She was a consensus builder. Political competition was not front and center. Trump on the other hand was one to belt it out dominantly like 'we're gonna beat and abuse the other (Democrat - his word, not mine) party cause they're a bunch of losers. It was a white collar suited version of abusive schoolyard bully.
In my mind, anyway.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brooklynite (Original post)

Tue Jun 30, 2020, 08:27 AM

3. You don't need a landslide for a mandate

You just govern like Republicans, and claim one. You're the winner, act on it!

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brooklynite (Original post)

Tue Jun 30, 2020, 08:33 AM

4. Clinton lost because.... blah blah blah.

Clinton won the election by over THREE MILLION votes. She lost the electoral college, an archaic institution put in place to appease slave owning states and which has a built in bias favoring conservatives. tRump barely squeaked by in a couple of key states for several reasons, including voter suppression, Russian misinformation, and that despicable Comey memo.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to groundloop (Reply #4)

Tue Jun 30, 2020, 08:38 AM

7. She lost...

You run a campaign with the election you have. It doesn't MATTER if the Electoral College is archaic, it's the method by which you win (or lose) the US Presidency.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brooklynite (Reply #7)

Tue Jun 30, 2020, 09:55 AM

19. Does treason matter?

FFS.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to groundloop (Reply #4)

Tue Jun 30, 2020, 09:00 AM

9. +1

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brooklynite (Original post)

Tue Jun 30, 2020, 09:06 AM

10. Hillary Clinton lost because the Russians interfered with the election AND voters stayed home...

Period.

Why are we going through this again?

AND it's from "The Hill", which is getting unabashedly anti-Democratic! Putting an exclamation point on this is the fact that the wife of the publisher of The Hill worked on Melania's white house staff.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to George II (Reply #10)

Tue Jun 30, 2020, 09:09 AM

11. Comey

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JI7 (Reply #11)

Tue Jun 30, 2020, 09:53 AM

18. Bingo!

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to George II (Reply #10)

Tue Jun 30, 2020, 10:14 AM

23. It Just Never Ends Does It?

even from those supposedly on our side.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to George II (Reply #10)

Tue Jun 30, 2020, 10:23 AM

24. And Comey. Look how the polls changed after his stunt

And let's never, ever forget the #s of so-called "progressive" voters who voted for IMPOTUS and Stein. Way more than IMPOTUS' margin of victory in the 3 states.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mcar (Reply #24)

Tue Jun 30, 2020, 11:11 AM

31. That was part of it, much bigger in my mind were those who pouted and voted "against"....

....Clinton because she won the nomination or just stayed home, and he obvious interference by the Russians.

I'll never forget watching the returns, I wish I'd charted it at the time. Clinton was ahead in the four key states at around 10:00 PM. Suddenly within about 15 minutes all four were "tied", then trump took a small lead. It was almost like someone was watching the results and adjusting them just enough to put trump ahead.

I know it looks like a "conspiracy theory", but I never saw anything like it in the decades of watching election returns. And as we found out with the Mueller report, there was interference.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to George II (Reply #31)

Tue Jun 30, 2020, 11:27 AM

32. Those who voted "against" were a big part of it

I will never forgive any of them - those supporters of a failed presidential candidate who voted for trump or Stein or didn't vote.

It is very possible some votes were changed. We know Russia was able to hack into some county elections systems.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brooklynite (Original post)

Tue Jun 30, 2020, 09:13 AM

12. Democratic strategist?

We’re running against a guy who cares deeply about size and numbers,” said one Democratic strategist. “The best way to tell him to go home is with a resounding defeat…That’s the only language he understands.


Is this what a "Democratic strategists" worry about, about how to "tell (Trump) to go home" and finding the "language he understands"? My humble suggestion is not to worry about Trump's thoughts and feelings and focus on getting 270 electoral votes.

This kind of fanciful thinking by "Democratic strategists" is what got Trump elected in the first place.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brooklynite (Original post)

Tue Jun 30, 2020, 09:37 AM

15. you challenge trump and GOP IN EVERY STATE, make the tidal wave one for the history books

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brooklynite (Original post)

Tue Jun 30, 2020, 09:56 AM

20. MI and PA are solid Biden leads, WI too but they're getting ready to steal it anyway:

There was a "Trafalagar Group" Wisconsin poll showing Trump ahead by 1 point last week, an anomoly as four other recent WI polls show Trump losing by 4-11%:

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2020/president/wi/wisconsin_trump_vs_biden-6849.html

What this says to me is that they'll pull any stunt, no matter how preposterous, to steal this election so I'm not taking anything for granted.




Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brooklynite (Original post)

Tue Jun 30, 2020, 09:57 AM

21. A 50 state strategy is always a good idea.

They don't have to concentrate on expanding, but give the people the respect of actually asking for their vote.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brooklynite (Original post)

Tue Jun 30, 2020, 10:57 AM

30. It's more complicated than that

It's tempting but facile analysis to think of each state in isolation and to spend time and money only in states that are battleground/tipping point states.

But this ignores several factors, including that sometimes all the analysis in the world ends up being wrong and a surprise victory in a non-battleground state turns out to make the difference.

Spending in non-battleground states generates national media attention, which can affect fundraising and the races in battleground states.

Spending in non-battleground states can force the opponent to defend "solid" states, wasting time, money, and effort that could otherwise go to fighting in the battleground states. Note that Donnie is already running ads in Texas and Georgia.

In some cases there may be spillover effects on neighboring states. Possibly some spending in Georgia reaches people in Florida, for example.


None of this necessarily means that it's definitely right to spend money outside of battleground states. Certainly the overwhelming focus of a campaign should be in those critical states. But occasional feints or even solid pushes in an opponents "safe" states can be part of a great strategy.


This is one of the reasons I bristle when Hillary gets flack for 2016. Was it a mistake to try to "expand the map" late in the campaign? Monday morning quarterbacks can point to the key states she lost, but it's facile to ignore the larger effects of spending in the other states.

Had she not tried to expand the map, it's possible that Donnie's campaign would have had more resources available for the battleground states and maybe nothing would have changed or maybe Donnie would have won those states by a wider margin.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brooklynite (Original post)

Tue Jun 30, 2020, 01:25 PM

36. AP, June 24: "Biden turns focus to Wisconsin with battle-tested hires"

Presumptive Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden is turning to a quartet of experienced Wisconsin political operatives to lead his campaign in a state that helped deliver President Donald Trump an Electoral College majority four years ago.

The former vice president’s campaign unveiled the team to The Associated Press on Wednesday, a day ahead of Trump’s planned visit to the state. Wisconsin, where Trump won by fewer than 23,000 votes in 2016, joins newly emerging battleground Arizona as the first two states where Biden has named his campaign team.

https://www.detroitnews.com/story/news/politics/2020/06/24/joe-biden-turns-focus-wisconsin-battle-tested-hires/112009478/



So it looks like Biden is bearing down on WI which is going to be a battleground state for sure and AZ which is more of a long shot. Another good omen is that Biden has visited WI many times, including at least twice as a Clinton surrogate in 2016, if memory serves...

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brooklynite (Original post)

Tue Jun 30, 2020, 02:23 PM

39. Locking

Alerted on as being analysis rather than late breaking news; forum hosts reviewed and agreed. Please post in GD instead.

Post the latest news from reputable mainstream news websites and blogs. Important news of national interest only. No analysis or opinion pieces. No duplicates. News stories must have been published within the last 12 hours. Use the published title of the story as the title of the discussion thread.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink