Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
2016 Postmortem
In reply to the discussion: 3,154,991 [View all]That Guy 888
(1,214 posts)73. She had tremendous help before the primaries started. A thumb was on the DNC scale in her favor.
I would not call all of the primaries meaningless from here on out, but there is every indication that Hillary Clinton will have more than enough delegates to win on the first ballot.
Sorry, I was apparently unclear. All Democratic Primary elections in the future will favor Clinton's approach in this current primary. If you had a candidate without Clinton's high negative favorable rating, the campaigning would (mostly) be limited to the general election.
From one of my previous posts:
So what IMO makes Secretary Clinton's campaign radically new? The elimination of voter input into the nomination process. If Secretary Clinton succeeds, why will any future Democratic nominee attempt to get to know the average voter? Why listen to ordinary Democrats (or Americans for that matter) when you only have to amass money (enough to outspend your opponents) use the momentum of monetary success to get support of leaders before the primary even starts, and reduce the average voter to easily stereotyped blocks (Women, Blacks, LGBT, Latinos, blue collar, hard working rural Whites, etc.) with leaders that can be impressed by your cash raising acumen.
Debbie Wasserman Schultz is not my favorite party leader...
Debbie Wasserman Schultz was her campaign manager in 2008! Imagine if at the start of the 2008 primary then Senator Obama's Senate campaign manager was in charge of the DNC. Debates are weekly in order to get his name recognition up against the better known Clinton. For the most part, they use the format Senator Obama is most comfortable with, and avoid the "Town Hall's" that Clinton prefers. When the "neutral" DNC head appears on cable or network news he speaks favorably of Senator Obama but does not mention other candidates. Does that help you understand what I'm talking about? Debbie Wasserman Schultz should have stepped down even if Sanders did not run because her past relationship represents a huge bias in favor of one of the candidates(Wasserman Schultz did nothing to erase that impression).
Sanders scores well in polls now, but he has not been subjected to unbridled Republican attacks; Hillary has not made a big issue of his age
She largely left those "artful smears" to her surrogates. Clinton's no spring chicken either, which is why that didn't get more traction. As far as the Clintons being attacked, the attacks have been in a rw frame. She ignores critics from her left, partly because marginalizing the left is ok in the DNC, and partly because they are based in reality Clinton does not want to address if she doesn't have to: super-predator("No one has asked me about that, before" ) her Iraq war vote ( I have no idea what her current excuse on that is), and most importantly what her State Department emails contained (Libya is a policy the she lobbied for, approval of a military coup in Honduras, wanting a more belligerent foreign policy than President Obama)
Donald Trump has not chosen to say anything about Jane Sanders (I'll leave that to your imagination)
No need, I've seen Clinton surrogates attack her. If Sanders won the primary would they work for Trump? The Clintons have a reputation for vindictiveness.
...comparatively little red-baiting has been done.
Actually there has been plenty, at one point that was the only form of coverage that Sanders received in the media.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
83 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
K & R, good post. Over three million more and we still have some primaries to go. You
Thinkingabout
May 2016
#1
bernie is in the top 2 or 3%. he IS an oligarch and here is the definition of the word...
msongs
May 2016
#3
I still can't believe, with a 26-year Congressional resume, he tried running as "an outsider."
IamMab
May 2016
#39
Democratic voting independents were given placebo ballots to vote on in Clinton's last 5 wins.
w4rma
May 2016
#7
If Arizona, New York and the entire South are your examples of fair elections, I don't want any part
w4rma
May 2016
#61
And in the general, should we limit the voting for the Dem candidate to the Dems as well?
Matt_in_STL
May 2016
#47
Bernie was somewhere around 3% in the national polls when he declared his candidacy.
liberal_at_heart
May 2016
#9
Ignoring the actual potential crime, she set up her server to bypass the Freedom of Information Act.
w4rma
May 2016
#13
The more they hide the taxes the more I think its possible they did do something dishonest
uponit7771
May 2016
#22
"It's not undemocratic" - Wrong, even if Sanders didn't run it would have been undemocratic.
That Guy 888
May 2016
#15
More sophistry and half truth. 1. She lobbied the SDs last time and lost, 2. she's been around so...
uponit7771
May 2016
#21
That is the title, read the post. It contains an excerpt from Mother Jones.
That Guy 888
May 2016
#72
Once again was Clinton's strategy designed to knock out ALL competition before a vote was cast?
That Guy 888
May 2016
#58
You don't seem to admit that Hillary Clinton has more votes, states, and delegates.
Algernon Moncrieff
May 2016
#60
You don't seem to admit that Hillary Clinton gamed the system to the detriment of democracy.
That Guy 888
May 2016
#62
She got those votes and delegates by people going to polling places and caucuses
Algernon Moncrieff
May 2016
#63
She had tremendous help before the primaries started. A thumb was on the DNC scale in her favor.
That Guy 888
May 2016
#73
+1, Actual quote " Ride this wave of democratic energy to overwhelm right-wing opposition ". Weaver
uponit7771
May 2016
#20
It's not only Democratic, but this primary is consistent with party tradition (almost).
Sancho
May 2016
#23
The independent investigation showed that Bernie did not steal data. When you say he stole data you
djean111
May 2016
#26
It showed that his campaign searched through proprietary data belonging to Hillary AND
pnwmom
May 2016
#32
Nothing IN THE WORLD could explain the shrieking bullshit about emails littering this forum
Number23
May 2016
#74
Essentially 12 to 9....yes it's winning, but that 9 is hardly an insignificant total
Armstead
May 2016
#80