2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumBernie's argument that winning southern Red states like Georgia dont matter, has been blow away.
New Poll: Dead heat in Georgia HRC vs. Trump.The poll shows early voters are essentially split between the two candidates with Trump earning 42 percent and Clinton receiving 41 percent.
"I think Hillary Clinton has a chance to win Georgia if she is willing to invest here and put people in the state," Democratic strategist Billy Linville said.
Clinton is getting more independent voters than Trump but almost 40 percent remain undecided. She also leads among women by 5 percent. Trump leads men by 6 percent but he has a double digit lead among voters over age 65.
Clinton won the Georgia Primary on March 1 in a landslide over Bernie Sanders with 71 percent of the vote. Trump beat out a long list of Republican candidates with 39 percent of the vote.
http://www.wsbtv.com/news/local/poll-georgians-largely-undecided-about-presidential-race/265867522
=============
How many posts did we see here about how unimportant it was Hillary winning the deep south "confederate" states primaries since we would never win those in the general? They sure look stupid now.
We have a chance this election to turn a number of red states blue.. like GA, AZ and perhaps even TX if Castro is the VP.
riversedge
(70,419 posts)Armstead
(47,803 posts)Sanders has said repeatedly that the Democratic Party needs to have a 50 state strategy. he does not wriote off the South in a broader sense.
His remarks were in response to the question of how HIS PRIMARY campaign could best utilize limited time and resources, especially at times where there were numerous states involved. He knew he had no chance in the South, so he was focused on states where he had a chance of winning or doing well.
I don't care if people disagree with him, but at least don;t distort things, please.
LonePirate
(13,437 posts)Talking about a 50 state strategy is nice but enacting is another ball game entirely.
thesquanderer
(11,998 posts)Unlike in a primary, Bernie would have the full resources of the Democratic party (the DNC etc.) at his back.
TimPlo
(443 posts)I mean DWS has endorsed GOP candidates in FL over DNC ones. And now looks like DNC front runner is courting GOP voters over liberals. So not sure if DNC is liberal party anymore.
mythology
(9,527 posts)"Her grasp now on the nomination is almost entirely on the basis of victories where Bernie Sanders did not compete," said senior strategist Tad Devine. "Where we compete with Clinton, where this competition is real, we have a very good chance of beating her in every place that we compete with her."
Devine named eight states where he said the Sanders campaign did not compete with a big presence on the ground or much on-air advertising: Texas, Alabama, Virginia, Louisiana, Tennessee, Mississippi, Georgia, and Arkansas. Clinton, Devine argued, "has emerged as a weak front-runner."
http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2016/03/sanders-campaign-makes-its-case-winning-nomination
Armstead
(47,803 posts)he is a professional spinner. That's one of the things he's paid to do....If he were working for Clinton, he'd be spinning for her just as much.
I prefer to takes Sanders own words as expressing what he's thinking.
Demsrule86
(68,768 posts)Well Clinton did not 'compete' in Indiana now did she...so Bernies victory is not relevant?
oberliner
(58,724 posts)Why would he not compete in those states if he knew it would give her an unsurmountable delegate lead?
griffi94
(3,733 posts)Bernie did seriously contest those states and still
got hammered.
Mr. Devine seems to have overlooked those.
DCBob
(24,689 posts)Why else even make that comment?
Fawke Em
(11,366 posts)And Georgia isn't going to Clinton.
mcar
(42,439 posts)He said time and again that Southern states' primary votes for HRC didn't mean anything. He cannot have it both ways.
pnwmom
(109,021 posts)he didn't have support there.
Armstead
(47,803 posts)It's been a perennial issue and concern since LBJ said "We just lost the South" after signing civil rights legislation.
You don't have to dig very deep into contemporary history for that.
But when an opponent of Clinton says it.....ooooooooooo suddenly all of history becomes irrelevant and he's a bad, bad man.
This perpetual disinformation campaign and denigration of all history BC (Before Clinton) has gotten really old. Just like the conservative attacks on liberal policies as "free stuff."
pnwmom
(109,021 posts)He only said that about southern red states with lots of African Americans.
Armstead
(47,803 posts)If you want to rewrite history to advance Clinton (TM) demographic marketing and branding strategy....er, political campaign, be my guest.
NurseJackie
(42,862 posts)... of the results, or was it one of his regular surrogates? I can't recall.
DCBob
(24,689 posts)in support of Bernie.
Eric J in MN
(35,619 posts)NT
NurseJackie
(42,862 posts)Found this:
Call it the Fuck the South reflex.
Yes, things like this do seem to be pervasive. In my opinion, many of the Sanders supporters have grabbed that baton and are running with it. It doesn't seem to be a very good strategy, but the belief that Southern states don't matter is one that probably makes his losses easier to accept (or to simply ignore) without having to find fault in their candidate, or in their overall strategy.
uponit7771
(90,370 posts)... with less PoC.
It was overt or at the least irrationally tone deaf
Joe the Revelator
(14,915 posts)....than Republicans voting for Hillary.
http://media.beta.wsbtv.com/document_dev/2016/05/06/Statewide%20Poll%20Pres%20May%205th%20xlsx_4271809_ver1.0.pdf
Joe the Revelator
(14,915 posts)#crosstabsmatter.
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)pnwmom
(109,021 posts)But not anymore because Georgia's demographics are changing and Hillary does well with a state with demographics like Georgia's.
Joe the Revelator
(14,915 posts)Demsrule86
(68,768 posts)There is no way Georgia votes for Bernie had he won the general...He would not get Virginia or Ohio either.
quaker bill
(8,225 posts)of winning Georgia. If she has the Midwest locked down by huge margins in October, then perhaps she should filter a few bucks at GA. Only as an after thought to expand the map, if that is possible at all.
Demsrule86
(68,768 posts)Georgia will be blue way before Texas...may this year ...maybe not. I would remind you people said the same about Virginia.
quaker bill
(8,225 posts)Trump signs litter the roads there. Hillary will do fine in Atl and Savanah... The rest of the state, not so much.
Demsrule86
(68,768 posts)And Trump will bring out the anti-Trump vote and there are moderate Gop types among the rabid right:any who were blue dogs in years gone by...I think it is possible. I lived there for over ten years.Georgians also have a really lousy Republican governor. No one thought Virginia would go, blue but it did. Dean was right, we compete in all 50 states. Dean was the best DNC chairman we ever had.
lancer78
(1,495 posts)of Georgia's population is non-white. Its a comin, there is a train coming through and the bigoted,rural white voter is standing on the tracks.
onenote
(42,821 posts)Utah, for example, which has gone Democratic once since the 1050s.
It was silly for some of Sanders' supporters to discount Clinton's victories in the South because they were in "red" states.
uponit7771
(90,370 posts)... the one big factor was the non southern red states did not have as diverse a population.
It was overt and at the least irrationally tone deaf to dismiss the southern states
Eric J in MN
(35,619 posts)He said: We lost the South, which is the most conservative part of the country, but we're looking forward to upcoming contests.
In other words, he was optimistic at the time about getting the most overall pledged delegates by doing well in the states which vote in the second half of primary season.
DCBob
(24,689 posts)He was making excuses for losing there and many of his supporters have backed him up with attacks on the south using terms like "confederate states" "red states" and that we will never win those in the general anyway so they dont matter as much as the "progressive" states. That's complete bullshit.
Eric J in MN
(35,619 posts)...should avoid discussing why they lost states.
It seems to offend without a benefit.
It would have been better if Sanders had just said, "I'm optimistic about upcoming contests," without saying anything about states he lost.
thesquanderer
(11,998 posts)It sounds to me like saying they were more conservative states was being used to explain why he expected to be able to do better elsewhere. Part of his job all along has been to convince people he still had a chance, even when events turned against him, because people seeing you as not having a chance can quickly become a self fulfilling prophecy.
But I won't even attempt to comment specifically on "tone" unless I see a video. Anyone got a link?
Demsrule86
(68,768 posts)Bernie Sanders told Nightly Show host Larry Wilmore at a taping Wednesday evening that scheduling Southern states early in the Democratic primary distorts reality. [
]
Well, you know, Sanders said, people say, Why does Iowa go first, why does New Hampshire go first, but I think that having so many Southern states go first kind of distorts reality as well.
Comments like these are an extension of a standard argument from the Sanders campaign: it may look like Hillary Clinton enjoys a sizable advantage, but her lead only exists because of the South. The reality, when its not distorted, is a lot different."
Yet somehow rightie states like Utah that are essentially white ...are significant. I don't know how Bernie explains these comments.
thesquanderer
(11,998 posts)As you stated, having small states like IA and NH go first arguably distorts things, as does then front-loading a whole bunch of southern states. Agree or disagree, I don't see what is unreasonable about this, nor where it implies that IA, NH, or southern states are not important. Saying that there is a skew in the way things play out is not the same as saying these states are insignificant, or less significant than Utah or whatever.
uponit7771
(90,370 posts)... words.
thesquanderer
(11,998 posts)When it's easy to see a different meaning when you take someone's words at face value, there's no rationale beyond personal bias to assign a more nefarious meaning.
Live and Learn
(12,769 posts)But we've gotten use to that here.
AgingAmerican
(12,958 posts)It is reactionary, and they don't matter in the GE.
Demsrule86
(68,768 posts)or Indiana.
AgingAmerican
(12,958 posts)Nebraska went D in 1992 and 1976
Utah is hopeless, just like the Deep south
uponit7771
(90,370 posts)CrowCityDem
(2,348 posts)HooptieWagon
(17,064 posts)...good luck with that plan.
DCBob
(24,689 posts)Demsrule86
(68,768 posts)But it will flip way before Texas.
Buns_of_Fire
(17,210 posts)With 40% undecided and Rump leading by double-digits with the over-65 crowd (one of Hillary's strong suits), it might be a little premature to break out the champagne this early.
DCBob
(24,689 posts)The country is full of angry low information voters brain washed by RW media.. we still need to work hard against all that to make sure they dont steal this election.
hellofromreddit
(1,182 posts)Are you slamming the deep south?
People around here are pretty touchy about that.
lancer78
(1,495 posts)i assume means all of America.
uponit7771
(90,370 posts)brush
(53,968 posts)They just about constitutues Clinton's delegate lead over Sanders.
It was a no-brainer. I never did get the ABSOLUTELY STUPID argument that the southern primaries didn't matter.
Sanders' campaign was asleep at the switch and didn't want to admit dropping the ball, thus, that argument.
It was like "duh", you have to win delegates to win the nomination to get to the general election. WTH are you sitting out all those early primaries?