2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumAbout this "electability thing." Bernie is electable if Democrats practice what they preach
Last edited Mon Oct 19, 2015, 11:17 AM - Edit history (2)
There's a lot of "I think Bernie's ideas are great but he's not as electable as Hillary" floating around.
Let's unpack that for a moment. Instead of that big amorphous claim, break it down into the categories of people who will actually be deciding whether to support Clinton or Sanders or the GOP Candidate in the General Election.
The GOP Candidate is a Wild Card. It could range from a safe Establishment guy like Bush to the Wild Eyed Demagogue Trump. So that's a factor that will be important but is unknown.
First off, we're always being told "Well no matter who the Democrats put up as the candidate, we all have to support him/her because it's so important to keep the GOP from winning." Okay, so let's say somehow Sanders were to get the nomination and a large majority of Democrats who preach that do that. That locks 99 percent of the partisan Democratic vote for Sanders. Likewise Clinton.
Now, most partisan Republicans are not going to vote for the Democratic nominee. It doesn't matter whether it's Bernie, Hillary or Jesus Himself.
That leaves those ever-popular Swing Voters and Independents to be fought over.
There's the non-partisan independents and Republicans who are scared and/or angry at the GOP for being such mean-spirited blockheads. You can likely add them to either Hillary or Bernie's column, unless the GOP candidate does well at selling snake oil, and/or the Dem candidate screws the pooch. (For those who say Bernie would screw the pooch, I;d say look at his unbroken string of successfully winning elections.)
Some of the independents may have Clinton Fatigue ....Others may actively like Clinton as a person enough to support her, Clinton evokes enough mixed feelings that these categories are not easily predictable.
Likewise for Bernie. He's still a newcomer to national recognition. Some may have a visceral dislike of him. Others may be attracted to his honest, straightforward personality, and trust his integrity. "I may not always agree with Bernie, but I know he's got my back."....... Only time and more familiarity will tell which of those would be predominant for Bernie. But so far, he's doing pretty good on that.
There's also the Obama Fatigue factor or the "I'm ready for a change from the Incumbent" faction who simply want a change. Clinton has a disadvantage there. Bernie? Not certain, but he could represent enough of a change to be the "candidate of a change" even if he is the Democratic candidate.
Some people might be skeered by the word "Socialist." They are so knee-jerk that they won't pay any attention whatsoever beyond that word. Take them out of the Bernie column. How many? Some. But IMO the more issues get discussed in the campaigns, the less that word will matter.
Some might be conservative enough to classify ANYONE who proposes programs that sound like taxes or regulations might be involved as a Socialist or, perhaps, a Damn Liberal. They won't vote for Bernie. But they won't vote for Hillary eitehr, unless she really plays an image switcheroo to become a conservative. That segment is a draw for both Bernie and Clinton.
Some are open minded. They actually pay some attention to issues, and are more interested in results than labels. They just choose who they think will represent their interests and values. "Making college affordable or free of tuition? Heck I've got three kids, I'm all for that." .........That segment is a draw. Those voters are up for grabs, and will depend on the respective abilities of Sanders or Clinton to sell their ideas.
Some are just pissed. They don't like Big Government or Big Business, they just feel like they're getting screwed. The GOP will try to convince them that Big Government is the problem. Bernie will fight to convince them that Big Business is the problem. Hillary? Well, that will depend on whether she's in a populist or centrist mood. But IMO Bernie has the edge on that one.
There are many other ways of breaking all this down.
But the point is, if you consider the conventional wisdom that the country is split between GOP/Conservative and Democratic/Liberal and about 1/3 bouncing around between those, IMO the electability argument is not a slam dunk for Clinton. It is far from inevitable that she'd do better than Bernie in winning over the segment of the population whose votes are up for grabs.
Perogie
(687 posts)Nominate Hillary. It will be like red meat to dogs. They hate her and will make sure they vote and their friends vote.
As Bernie points out about the mid-terms. Republicans didn't win, Democrats failed to show up at the polls.
Bernie will energize the young vote and has done well with independents and even has picked up votes from moderate Republicans.
Hillary will NEVER get any Republican vote and isn't doing well with Independents (42%).
So this augment that she will do better against the GOP is a crock. I'm pretty sure she will lose the election if nominated.
Agschmid
(28,749 posts)That's what worries me.
Armstead
(47,803 posts)They tend to get more excited about change than status quo.
Agschmid
(28,749 posts)And in some groups underperformed compared to previous candidates.
http://www.civicyouth.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/CIRCLE_2013FS_outhVoting2012FINAL.pdf
Armstead
(47,803 posts)"Youth turnout was strong in 2008, compared to the average since 1972, but it fell again in 2012."
They shouldn't have stayed home in 2012, but by then Obama was no longer a new fresh face and the inspiring aspects of that Hope and Change had worn off.
jwirr
(39,215 posts)at who is providing all the money that Bernie is collecting.
Agschmid
(28,749 posts)If you are referencing the age of the donors, I don't seem to be easily able to Google it.
jwirr
(39,215 posts)who are the most upset about the corporate takeover of the government and elections etc. They are young enough to still be idealists. And to back it up with actions.
I wonder how many people here are still young idealists? I might do an OP to find out.
Hortensis
(58,785 posts)themselves against the chain link. True, they're just realizing Bernie's on the plate too. Here's a little indication of what Michael Savage listeners want to hear:
Bernie Sanders for example. Bernie is a particular case. Jewish atheist, Jewish atheist, everything about him sets off comedic shockwaves in me. Bernie Sanders, I know the type. They were on the margins of my life. They hated America, they hated Christians. I know the type. I ran from them. They made me sick."
Theyre the antithesis of my existence, that type of Jewish atheist: the liberal weasel Jew. Thats what I call Bernie Sanders, and look how popular he is with other anti-American weasels who love him. I said yesterday make no mistake about it wouldnt be where he is was it not for the Hillary camp, who may as well be running him.
And he may as well be a running dog of the Hillary camp because by espousing the stupidity that he espouses, it makes her look like a centrist even though shes a leftist. So he may as well be just a front man for her, a warm up act.
Savage has about 4 million regular listeners in 300 markets across the nation. They vote in very high numbers. Expect his audience to climb as Sanders becomes better known on the right.
Or from a right wing blog typical of those dishing up red meat to the hungry:
"Whether by accident or by design, Bernie Mania will likely help Killary Rotten Clinscum's campaign by making her seem like a "moderate" in comparison. In Heartland American states such as Iowa, where most Democrats would never regard themselves as full blown Marxists (though they basically are), the facade of "moderation" is important for a Demoncrap Presidential candidate. Even Obongo's handlers understood the importance of packaging the Big Zero as "post-partisan" back in 2008.
As for Bernie the Bolshevik, a self-described "democratic socialist", it is amusing to see some in the alternative news community falling hook, hammer and sickle for his "outsider" populist act - a cynical scam sold to the sheeple by the seditious scribblers of Sulzberger's Slimes. Far from being an "outsider", Sanders is a dyed-in-the-wool pro-Fed and pro-Israel Marxist from Ben & Jerry's commie-pinko-hippie Vermont. Sander's fake "populism" is that of the Jewish rabble-rouser on a soap box, a la Leon Trotsky (Russia), Emma Goldman (United States), Rosa Luxemburg (Germany) and Bela Kun (Hungary)."
This is a little sample of them BEFORE they get worried about Bernie. Keep an eye on the bircher types (aka TP types), as well as the Christian right. He's proof that the U.N. plot to infiltrate and take over America is almost complete. And, no, we're not even talking about the certifiable crazies here. We're talking about 40 million and more conservative voters who just know our nation is always under attack and need to know where the threats are coming from -- So they can attack first, before it's too late.
Armstead
(47,803 posts)You're right. They'll be out for Sanders scalp. Jesus Himself could tun as a D and they'd do the same.
But have you listened to Hannity lately? Clinton should already have been locked up for life according to him.
But back to Bernie....
Hortensis
(58,785 posts)do that nearly often enough.
Coming from them, this stuff IS a compliment and affirmation that we, and Bernie, are doing something right. But whether it's talk radio stirring up the fringes, or Hannity, or Charles Krauthammer disguising it with a faux-intellectual gauze, they're all pressing the same messages. HRC was correct that there is a vast right wing conspiracy. We are in a battle for the future of our country and the principles that define it.
Armstead
(47,803 posts)but sadly true as applied to their interpretation of anyone who isn't a hard core GOP wingnut
Hortensis
(58,785 posts)at lot more "hard core GOP wingnut." This is from fivethirtyeight.com, Nate Silver's site. Many of these people were adults in the 1970s, which means, what? They would despise themselves if they looked back with clear eyes? Or just consider their prior selves corrupted by the '60s?
"Moreover, Republican voters have become more conservative in recent years. Putting the General Social Survey on our 0 to 100 scale, the average self-identified Republican has shifted from a 57 in 1974 to a 71 in 2014, the most conservative ever. In the June YouGov polls, the average self-identified Republican ideology was also a 71."
?w=610&h=474
BTW, this is from an article explaining that TED CRUZ is probably electable in 2016. "The Anointed One" is shockingly popular in those "friendly, conforming" midwest and southern regions described in another thread. Nate considers him the most extreme of all the GOP candidates, but cons don't consider him extreme AT ALL.
[link:http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/ted-cruz-ted-cruz-ted-cruz/|
Armstead
(47,803 posts)He didn't consider it at all inconsistent to be a moderate Republican and still agree with most of Jessee Jackson's civil rights and economic agenda.
He'd be rolling in his grave if he saw the current mindset of Republican conservatoires,
Hortensis
(58,785 posts)dirtydickcheney
(242 posts)I know more than one who likes Bernie - they think he's genuine.
Then there's that thing about Republican (whoever the Republican nominee is) vs. Republican-Lite (that would be Hillary if she gets the nomination). Republicans always vote Republican in those circumstances.
And frankly I'm tired of these Republican-Lite Presidents like Clinton and Obama.
Hortensis
(58,785 posts)Zing Zing Zingbah
(6,496 posts)by whichever despicable candidate the republicans nominate. There might actually be a few republicans that do not like their candidate, whoever it might be, and they decide not to vote or they are moderate enough to vote for the democrat. I think the republicans are more divided right now than the democrats are. Independents aren't necessarily going throw their votes to a republican because Hillary has the nomination. It all depends on who that republican nominee is. A lot more needs to play out before we can make any accurate forecasts on any of this.
reformist2
(9,841 posts)jfern
(5,204 posts)Well less electable than Bernie or Biden, and quite likely O' Malley. Maybe not Chafee or Webb.
cprise
(8,445 posts)at least in numbers that break the Republican majority.
edgineered
(2,101 posts)The R's will feel confident enough in her losing that they will continue with their current strategies and candidates. There may be a plan B for the R's if Clinton does not get the nomination; that would be their nomination of someone more favorably rated or with better name recognition, perhaps someone like Rmoney or McCain.
Armstead
(47,803 posts)It;s really a wild card at this point. They've got their own intra party schisms going on that make the Democratic divisions look like a Love In.
Manifestor_of_Light
(21,046 posts)It was 1948.
They were standing in a long line on election day saying, "Well we know Harry Truman won't win, but we'll vote for him anyway!"
And we all know what happened. He won.
Armstead
(47,803 posts)jwirr
(39,215 posts)brooklynite
(94,535 posts)The average Democrat isn't hanging out on a political blog, to get your simple solution.
Armstead
(47,803 posts)By the yardstick of "how do you plan to get them to?" every goddamn post on DU is just useless debris floating in the vast void of cyberspace.
AgentStepford
(19 posts)They'd like to think that they are brave by staring down the vast emptiness of Space (and the solitary exercise of typing a response to a message board) and then declaring that Humanity is ultimately useless. As I see it, they are people who don't have the courage to define themselves as a living force... as opposed to a chunk of driftwood. It takes an act of character to view the ebb and flow of life and society, and decide to swim towards a goal.
I'd dare say that's what we are doing on this and other message boards. Defining ourselves. As individuals and perhaps buoying up like-minded people. As a force for social involvement.
Perhaps brooklynite would be happier posting on the "I'd just as well be literally Underground" message board? I could be wrong. This is just my second thread.
Armstead
(47,803 posts)tend to state things in hyperbole to make a point
AgentStepford
(19 posts)I'm just coming out of a cloud of a very nasty flu, and realize now that I oughtn't to have chosen this time to join a message board. lol
I was cranky as hell, and nihilists are a pet peeve.
For your entertainment:
Armstead
(47,803 posts)WillyT
(72,631 posts)pinebox
(5,761 posts)Many Dems don't. They'd rather see someone elected who has name recognition more than anything.
Bread and Circus
(9,454 posts)the issues.