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
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
SunSeeker
SunSeeker's Journal
SunSeeker's Journal
November 12, 2013
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/politics/2013/11/elizabeth_warren_hillary_clinton_and_2016_speculation_media_is_applying.html
The Media’s 2016 Presidential Fantasies
Race matters. Theres no mention of the Democratic Partys ethnic demographics in theNew Republics or the New York Times Warren pieces. Scheiber reminds us that Obama was able to upset Hillary Clinton: All it takes is a single issue and a fresh face to bring the bad memories flooding back among progressives. Both Scheiber and the New York Times Jonathan Martin mention Bill de Blasios victory in New York Citys Democratic primary for mayor. And you cant explain the Obama or the de Blasio win without black voters.
A refresher: The president beat Clinton in a 50-state primary that she nearly won, by the end, as the salience of the Iraq War faded. Obama trounced Clinton in most of the caucuses, building a delegate margin, but he only stayed competitive because of black voters in Southern primary states. Obama was fading until the South Carolina primary, when an electorate that was mostly black gave him a landslide that polling hadnt predicted. There were 35 primaries to go: Clinton won 21 of them. (That number includes the Florida and Michigan races, which held votes but saw no campaigning due to a party dispute. Still, Clinton won them.) Of the states that went for Obama, only six of themIllinois, Montana, Oregon, Utah, Vermont, and Wisconsingave him the win among white voters.
...
The point isnt just that Hillary Clinton is the Democratic front-runner. No one doubts that; everyones a little bored by that. The point is that its risky, weak strategy to make a presidential primary the test kitchen for policy change. Conservatives learned this brutally in 1972 when they urged Ohio Rep. John Ashbrook to run against Richard Nixon. What I fear is a dissipation of our strength, wrote William F. Buckley to a friend. He was perceptive: Ashbrook won a wan 9.7 percent of the New Hampshire vote, and Nixon was emboldened to ignore the right.
Over time, conservatives stopped expecting a president to get elected, lead, and solve all their problems. They built a grassroots machine and a litany of policy goalsthe activists would speak, and the president would nod along. By 2012, Grover Norquist could tell a national conferencethat the next Republican president need only come to the job with enough working digits to handle a pen. Thats where progressives need to get, that un-glamorous and under-covered triumph of movement over party. Maybe, like Ron Paul, they can use a campaign to build the ranks. But if the Obama experience hasnt taught them that a dreamy presidential candidate wont bring about paradise, what will?
A refresher: The president beat Clinton in a 50-state primary that she nearly won, by the end, as the salience of the Iraq War faded. Obama trounced Clinton in most of the caucuses, building a delegate margin, but he only stayed competitive because of black voters in Southern primary states. Obama was fading until the South Carolina primary, when an electorate that was mostly black gave him a landslide that polling hadnt predicted. There were 35 primaries to go: Clinton won 21 of them. (That number includes the Florida and Michigan races, which held votes but saw no campaigning due to a party dispute. Still, Clinton won them.) Of the states that went for Obama, only six of themIllinois, Montana, Oregon, Utah, Vermont, and Wisconsingave him the win among white voters.
...
The point isnt just that Hillary Clinton is the Democratic front-runner. No one doubts that; everyones a little bored by that. The point is that its risky, weak strategy to make a presidential primary the test kitchen for policy change. Conservatives learned this brutally in 1972 when they urged Ohio Rep. John Ashbrook to run against Richard Nixon. What I fear is a dissipation of our strength, wrote William F. Buckley to a friend. He was perceptive: Ashbrook won a wan 9.7 percent of the New Hampshire vote, and Nixon was emboldened to ignore the right.
Over time, conservatives stopped expecting a president to get elected, lead, and solve all their problems. They built a grassroots machine and a litany of policy goalsthe activists would speak, and the president would nod along. By 2012, Grover Norquist could tell a national conferencethat the next Republican president need only come to the job with enough working digits to handle a pen. Thats where progressives need to get, that un-glamorous and under-covered triumph of movement over party. Maybe, like Ron Paul, they can use a campaign to build the ranks. But if the Obama experience hasnt taught them that a dreamy presidential candidate wont bring about paradise, what will?
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/politics/2013/11/elizabeth_warren_hillary_clinton_and_2016_speculation_media_is_applying.html
Profile Information
Gender: Do not displayHome country: USA
Current location: Southern California
Member since: Sun Mar 20, 2011, 12:05 PM
Number of posts: 51,550