Foreigner has question about primaries

[DetlefK]

As I understood it, Hillary Clinton is faring better than Bernie Sanders in red states. Is that correct?


Now, let's assume that Bernie Sanders is faring better than HRC in blue states.
Wouldn't that make Hillary Clinton the candidate of choice for the Democrats?


In a broad generalization:

- HRC winning Democrats in a red state means that she's culturally more in tune with that state than Bernie. And that means that she has a good chance to siphon republican voters in that state in the general election. At the same time, Bernie is doing better in a blue state than HRC, meaning that he's culturally more in tune with that state than HRC. Bernie has a worse chance to siphon republican voters in the general election.

- On the other side, blue states in general can be considered relatively safe, because the republican candidates are exceptionally horrible this election-year. It's unlikely that the republican candidate will make significant wins in a blue state.



Yes, it's just a broad generalization, it's cold-hearted politics, the red-state-blue-state antagonism is unrealistic and my personal political preferences are closer to those of Bernie Sanders, but still...

If HRC is better at winning votes in red states than Bernie, and if there's little risk for blue states to flip red, wouldn't that make HRC the better candidate?

[leftofcool]

1. No, every state count in the primaries.

It is only about delegates at this point.

[rogerashton]

2. The calculation is

that she cannot siphon off enough votes in Alabama and South Carolina to win there. Indeed, to the extent that the Pubs represent white supremacists in those states, and her successes come from the votes of African-americans, she won't get any. Thus, better to "bring out the base" in the states we can win.

Not saying I agree with that -- I don't -- but that is the line of reasoning.

[BainsBane]

3. It doesn't mean those states will flip

The differences have largely to do with the demographics of the region. The South has a high African American population, and they are Clinton's strongest base of voting support.

She is a stronger candidate, not because of where she wins but for the simple fact that far more voters support her.
She leads him by 2.5 million popular votes, 300 earned delegates and nearly 800 total delegates. Sanders uphill climb is enormous.

Now a Trump or Cruz nomination could put some of those states in contention. This is a strange election cycle. Who knows how that will all play out.

[Hortensis]

6. Mostly what Bains says, except there is something to

whaat you are thinking too, of course, because the candidate who gets the most truly independent votes and the most genuinely moderate voters who sometimes vote candidate instead of party will swing those states in p!ay and be our next president.

In this very peculiar election, also, we could just see a significant crossover conservative vote, and Hillary does seem the likely recipient of most of that for obvious reasons.

[Wounded Bear]

7. Except for the RW Hillary bashing of the last 20 years...

At first glance it seems you might be right, but the RW echo chamber has been labeling Hillary "the most liberal...." whatever for 25 years. She is a real motivator for the Repub base, who is likely to come out just to vote against her. Most of the rubes over there have no concept of how center-right Hillary is on many issues.

It truly is a strange election in many ways.

[Hortensis]

8. We are not talking about the base, though.

Anyway, after all those sites BSers mine for hillhate material got to work on Sanders, the base would be frothing at the mouth with every mention of his name. Bernie Sanders = Saul Alinsky = radical Jewish menace is only one theme readied to blanket America.

That Bernie Sanders is a secret die-hard communist plotting to take over the United States is already the belief of at least 30 million Americans of Tea arty/John Birch mentality. It is just being ignored by the media so far, and by the right wing operators who are hoping he will take Hillary out for them.

And then there's the overlapping Religious Right. Interestingly, although her womanhood is a major reason the base/RR loathes her, they've never actually claimed that she is Satan or one of his major minions. I think it's safe to say that Sanders does not enjoy that natural protection.

And he is bare ass naked when it comes to examination of the first 30 years of his adulthood. Conservatives really don't like hippie left-wing radical agitators who can't hold jobs and have children out of wedlock, and that's a clean version from someone actually thinks he had a perfect right to live his life that way and becomea U.S. Senator later. But they will not see Sanders as an embodiment of the American dream but rather as more of a symptom of societal illness where feckless no-gooders can get into Congress.

[lagomorph777]

9. Most media discussions implicitly assume independents are in-between Dem and Repug

Many of us are far to the left of both, so capturing these independents will require somebody who is neither center-right nor extreme-batshit-crazy-fascist. It's not about grabbing crossover votes from the batshit-crazies, it's about showing your own party's average voter (center to center-left) that there is some reason to show up at to vote at all.

If you actually take the time to look at the polls, Hillary is consistently the weakest Democratic candidate in the GE. Fortunately, the same polls show that Trump is the weakest GOP candidate in the GE.

Polls consistently show that both parties are on track to nominate their weakest candidates:
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/2016_presidential_race.html

General Election: Trump vs. Clinton
Poll Date Clinton (D) Trump (R) Spread
RCP Average 2/11 - 3/6 47.3 41.0 Clinton +6.3

General Election: Cruz vs. Clinton
Poll Date Cruz (R) Clinton (D) Spread
RCP Average 2/10 - 3/6 46.2 45.4 Cruz +0.8

General Election: Trump vs. Sanders
Poll Date Sanders (D) Trump (R) Spread
RCP Average 2/10 - 3/6 50.8 40.8 Sanders +10.0

General Election: Cruz vs. Sanders
Poll Date Sanders (D) Cruz (R) Spread
RCP Average 2/10 - 2/27 50.0 40.3 Sanders +9.7

[Hortensis]

10. Reality matters. Most indies reliably vote for the

party they left.

Repeat: Most indies reliably vote for the party they left. They're pretend indies, hypocritical enablers who just don't want the label or the blame.

That is why I spoke of "true" independents, people who vote for candidates, not party. These are fewer but rational and worth wooing.

Then, of course, there are also the regrettable others who are too clueless to know where's a difference between left and right -- i.e., truly independent of knowledge and duty -- but for whatever reason want to vote anyway. They flap in the wind, and one can only hope they like the First Lady's dress, are newly impressed by Trump's "strength," are frightened by a storm, or whatever works to push them the desired way, just before the election.

In any case, the vote of both is unpredictable but often the deciding factor in elections.

[lagomorph777]

12. Nice theory, completely refuted by the polls.

And confirmed last night by the latest CNN poll. Bernie beats Trump (+20) MUCH harder than Hillary would (+13). And Bernie is the ONLY one that could beat both Cruz and Kasich. When it's a contest between right and far right, but the electorate has been left behind on the left (hello, 99% of us are working folks), then the media/Brazile/Wasserman-Schultz assumptions completely break down.

[Hortensis]

16. The GE will be entirely different. Bernie could be

our newest McGovern.

McGovern WAS Bernie in 1972. He galvanized anti-establishment reform liberals with grassroots organization, he was very anti-war, pro-people/populist, didn't take the South, business opposed him, the far left loved him, and he came from behind to win nomination at the convention.

He lost to Nixon in a landslide.

Understand, guys, NO ONE KNOWS ANY DETAILS ABOUT BERNIE yet. But the day he won, the the right wing lies machine would start burying the nation nose-deep in BERNIE-HATE messages and demands would start for investigations and indictments. The only mention of Hillary would be to associate him with hillhate. And from that, Bernie would become known to another 100 million voters and "feel the bern" would take on a whole new meaning.

[lagomorph777]

17. Hillary will be the next Spiro Agnew or John Edwards

once Donald Dump is through with her. Why start with a candidate we know is damaged goods?

[Hortensis]

20. No, now you're just wishful-thinking. Lago,

everyone thinks they "knew" Hillary was damaged goods as you put it looong ago. Old story. And yet here she is.

Secretary of State.
U.S. Senator from New York State.
Presumptive Democratic Party nominee for President of the United States, and prohibitive national favorite for that office, with a majority of the vote.

Lago, although Hillary's not left enough for some of us, we like her anyway because she is extremely competent and her policies are needed, well thought out, and doable.

We really like that last and that she is not lying to us about what she can achieve.

(Very unlike Bernie Sanders, who is, famously, lying about what he can achieve.)

[lagomorph777]

21. No, Hillary is lying about what Bernie can achieve

His policies make economic sense except to the trickle-downers currently running the Democratic Party.

[Hortensis]

22. IMO, your post is very disconnected from reality.

Please read solid, well regarded information about current politics. I actually think you would end up much happier. You don't know it, but you're going to win at least somewhat even if Bernie loses, or perhaps even more than if he won. But wouldn't it be nicer to feel relatively good and hopeful instead of frightened and resentful?

[lagomorph777]

23. Absolutely, it will be nice to feel good and hopeful.

Which is why I'm so excited about Bernie, especially now that it's clear what voters need to do in the remaining states, if we want to win in the GE.

And I consider economic policies to be about economics and politics. Bernie wins on both counts. Trickle-down loses on both counts.

[Hortensis]

24. Hope is good, as long as it is built on possibilities

and not self deception. In this mostly positive post I can find almost nothing to disagree with -- as long as reasonable hope is alive you should go for it.

Except the trickle-down nonsense. I am 100% opposed to everything meant by "trickle-down," and I am wholly frustrated by those too ignorant to understand who their enemies are!!! -- those who either don't know or refuse to admit that their self-indulgent partisanship is serving their enemies, not themselves.

[lagomorph777]

25. If HRC ends up being our nominee, obviously I will do what I have to...

...to stop Donald Dump. It's a lot scarier in that case, because Bernie is far stronger in the General Election. And of course his policies are preferable to a non-billionaire such as myself. But I would take a Goldwater over a Hitler any day.

[Hortensis]

29. IMO, Donald Trump might just be the best

of the lot on the right. That's because he is not very controllable by the usual big right-wing funders in the background. Those include people who have been plotting for up to 40 years some of them to transfer power and wealth from us to them and to change the basic governing philosophy, social and economic, of our country.

I'd take a Goldwater over a Hitler any day also, as long as the Goldwater and Hitler weren't both marching in step with shadow figures hiding in the background.

[cally]

4. In the general, the concern is the "purple" states that are must wins

In the general election, only a few states are likely to vote differently. For instance, we know that California will vote for the Democratic candidate and Alabama will vote for the Republican. We don't know what Ohio, Florida, Colorado, etc. will do. Those Presidential elections tend to be very close. President Obama carried many of the "swing states".

[redruddyred]

5. i read about that sanders does much better with independent voters

which make up to 50% of the electorate in some states
my instinct is that this is the statistic that counts but of course i'm biased

[lagomorph777]

11. Sanders pointed this out; CNN's latest poll confirms it: Sanders is far superior in the GE

The meme that "Hillary is more electable" is completely false. According to the latest CNN poll (last night), Hillary can beat Trump by 13 points; Bernie can beat Trump by 20 points. This has been true for at least a month; if anything it is becoming more true with each new poll.

[oberliner]

13. Those southern states are not going to flip

They are all Republican locks.

[Lizzie Poppet]

14. Siphoning voters in red states doesn't do her any good if she doesn't WIN the state.

All but two states are winner-take-all in terms of assigning the Electors that actually vote for president. The Electoral College is an anti-democratic anachronism...but one it will take a constitutional amendment to remove. Americans don't actually directly vote for their president.

[lagomorph777]

18. Playing Pug-Lite is as supid now as it has always been

And the polls make it pretty clear why. Dems have told the base to pound sand for too long, and can't survive one more election cycle on right wing crap.

[Lizzie Poppet]

19. Agreed. A big chunk of the party seems to be rejecting the current center-left positioning.

Not, sadly, the majority in primary states so far, though... But at least the trend has started moving in the right direction, at last.

[bigwillq]

15. GDP is two blocks to the left

[RandySF]

26. This is within the universe of Democratic primary voters.

[KamaAina]

27. Questions about the Democratic primaries from all nationalities go in GD-Primaries

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=forum&id=1251

[onecaliberal]

28. Anyone who think Clinton is going to siphon support from republicans in red states

Must have been living in fantasy world for the last 2 decades.

[Ruby the Liberal]

30. Keep in mind the electoral college

Popular vote doesn't win - each state is assigned a number of electors, and all but 1 or 2 states (Nebraska and ?) are winner take all.