2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumHas anyone else noticed two new memes being shopped around?
The first is that the South States are "deep red confederate States" eg. Clinton is apparently winning due to white racist conservatives, completely discounting the significant share of African Americans who (Cornel West and Killer Mike notwithstanding) intend to vote for Clinton in overwhelming numbers.
The variant to this is that the Southern States "aren't needed for the General Election" and that with "limited resources", Sanders should be focusing his attention elsewhere. Setting aside the point that North Carolina and Virigina have been in play in recent elections, or that Sanders isn't doing appreciably better in States that ARE needed for the General Election, OR that Sanders has been raking in money and SHOULD have the resources he needs (perhaps overspending in NH and IA?), the bottom line is that you still need to win a majority of delegates, and discounting a huge swatch of delegate-rich States isn't the smartest way to do it.
leftofcool
(19,460 posts)Renew Deal
(81,866 posts)So winning a at might make them feel good, but at 16 delegates it's not all that effective.
stonecutter357
(12,697 posts)sufrommich
(22,871 posts)votes from red states mean nothing and we should just ignore them. Also,women are obsessed with vagina voting.
leftofcool
(19,460 posts)hedda_foil
(16,375 posts)kstewart33
(6,551 posts)Codeine
(25,586 posts)icky and medical and stuff.
sufrommich
(22,871 posts)I'm going to have to retrieve it from the surgeon who stole it from me.
Warren Stupidity
(48,181 posts)to Democratic candidates in the general election. That is a fact that is logically derived from our awful election process. So yes we need a candidate that will do better in the STATES THAT ARE IN PLAY.
NurseJackie
(42,862 posts)It could backfire on them (or not) but it could ... at this point, I get the impression that they're all just thinking to themselves "Fuck-it! Give it a shot! What have we got to lose?"
So much of their rhetoric and attacks are SO over-the-top that it's the only reason that makes sense.
Oh well. This will be over pretty soon.
Go, Hillary! We love you!
Arkansas Granny
(31,519 posts)Democratic nominee right now, not the President. I live in one of those "deep red" states. My vote will count in the primaries even if it won't have much effect in selection of President in the general election. However, my vote could be very important in the down ticket races.
SidDithers
(44,228 posts)Sid
all american girl
(1,788 posts)Look, I can understand about SC, with Super Tuesday just a few days later, but TX and FL...those a big states. I'm not sure if this is the best for Bernie. On top of it, this is not the general, ALL dems have a right to hear from both candidates, not be written off because they are in a red state.
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,710 posts)all american girl
(1,788 posts)I was living overseas, like now, so I missed a lot of the news stuff....at least that's my defense and I'm sticking with it
Motown_Johnny
(22,308 posts)So you forgive her for the shit she pulled in Michigan in 2008?
As someone who voted in that election, I sure as hell don't and it is a contributing factor as to why I can't believe anything she says.
LexVegas
(6,070 posts)Gothmog
(145,343 posts)African American and Latino voters are key segments of the base of the Democratic Party and the nominee has to be able to appeal to these segments of the base
Yavin4
(35,443 posts)You can't get legislation passed with legislators only from blue states.
JI7
(89,252 posts)Nitram
(22,822 posts)They will vote in the Democratic primaries. The KKK is not voting in Democratic primaries. The African American community's vote is often decisive.
hobbit709
(41,694 posts)i.e. SC in 1976.
brooklynite
(94,606 posts)DemocratSinceBirth
(99,710 posts)Bad Thoughts
(2,524 posts)Sorry for the reality check.
William769
(55,147 posts)Bluenorthwest
(45,319 posts)Why do you get those tropes? In response to the endless blather about the extreme whiteness of Iowa and NH and Vermont, whose voters have been treated poorly on your side.
Personally, I see the Southern States as the Pro Discrimination Conservative Bloc. Each of those States, the entire region, has retained anti gay laws which permit discrimination in employment and in housing against LGBT persons who have absolutely no legal recourse to object when told 'we don't hire your kind'.
The voters there are people who are content to live in bigoted societies, many in our own Party in those States are openly hostile to LGBT rights and persons. We all remember Obama in 08 pandering to South Carolina with a line up of hateful ex gay evangelists preaching against those gays under a Democratic banner. Those were not Republicans he was seeking support from, those were pews full of highly biased Democrats.
So why am I supposed to do as those anti gay States want? Frankly the fact that half of this Party wants them to dictate to the rest of us is very disturbing. It's a hair away from Trump Town. You think it is different to attack LGBT than to attack another minority group but that's not actually true. It's teh same. And pandering to anti gay bigots is very similar to Trump's pandering to bigots who hate Latinos or Middle Eastern peoples. Very similar. It's the same thing.
brooklynite
(94,606 posts)Tierra_y_Libertad
(50,414 posts)brooklynite
(94,606 posts)Realistically however, I recognize that a national Primary would allow only the most well-funded of candidates to participates, and that starting with small States test's a candidate's ability to relate to actual voters.