2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumWhat Really Happened on Super Tuesday
http://benjaminstudebaker.com/2016/03/02/what-really-happened-on-super-tuesday/But many media outlets helped Clinton stay in the race in 2008 by painting the race as a close contest. Today many of those same outlets are trying to write Sanders off, and if were not careful this may become self-fulfilling. It doesnt help that Super Tuesday in 2016 was dominated by southern states where Sanders is weak. In 2008, the Super Tuesday list was more geographically diverse, and despite being behind in the polls nationally, Clinton won 12 states to Obamas 11. With the south heavy schedule this year, Sanders trailed on Super Tuesday 7 to 4. Its important for everyone to remember that Bernie Sanders is not running for president of the Confederacy....
No individual anti-Trump has shown any ability to consistently consolidate support in a region. Cruz was second in the south, Kasich was second in the northeast, and Rubio was mostly third. Carson was irrelevant. The folks who want you to believe that this isnt over push the Trump ceiling fantasy, which holds that if any of these folks drop out, nearly 100% of their supporters will go to an anti-Trump. Only affluent pundits who are disconnected from ordinary republican voters could possibly think this. Trumps favorability numbers among republicans are about as good as anybodys:...
Lets admit the obvious. Barring some freak incident, Donald Trump is going to be the republican nominee. We just dont know which democrat is going to run against him yet. After reading this terrific piece by Nathan Robinson, I hope for the sake of the country its Sanders.
Faux pas
(14,582 posts)Betty Karlson
(7,231 posts)Let me recommend it as well.
Faux pas
(14,582 posts)feel free to use it anytime you want.
onenote
(42,374 posts)the nominee of the Democratic Party.
Which happens to include Democrats in every state, not just those that the Democrats usually win in presidential years.
Qutzupalotl
(14,230 posts)like mine.
onenote
(42,374 posts)even if he's mathematically eliminated before then.
Gamecock Lefty
(698 posts)If Bernie isn't running for the Confederacy, as you say, what the hell was he campaigning for in the South before Super Tuesday??? Maybe he isn't for ALL the people after all?
KamaAina
(78,249 posts)Unknown Beatle
(2,672 posts)What the writer meant was that Sanders wasn't running only to be the president of the Confederacy, but rather the whole nation. Thus, he wasn't running to be the president of the Confederacy. But, Hillary supporters say since he lost the southern states, that he lost the nomination and should concede and his supporters should go support Hillary instead.
99th_Monkey
(19,326 posts)Uncle Joe
(58,111 posts)Thanks for the thread, KamaAina.
Thespian2
(2,741 posts)Nitram
(22,671 posts)Obama came from way behind to win. It was a nail biter. But Clinton will trounce Trump because a majority of Republicans can't abide him, and Democrats (at least the sane ones) would never let Trump win.
Motown_Johnny
(22,308 posts)The only thing that even begins to give that illusion is the crap Hillary pulled in Michigan.
After Super Tuesday it was a close race, but then Obama took control and pulled ahead.
There is no reason to believe Clinton will "trounce" Trump. In fact, most evidence points to Hillary losing to him.
mountain grammy
(26,568 posts)in any scenario.
femmedem
(8,187 posts)The electoral college stats are more compelling than the national polling. I've been looking for something like this. Thanks for posting it. Would love to know where you found it--or did you put it together yourself?
Darb
(2,807 posts)TIME TO PANIC
(1,894 posts)Trust Buster
(7,299 posts)Hillary trounced Bernie with the AA and Hispanic demographics. A trend not likely to change. A bad omen for Bernie's hopes. That's what REALLY happened on Super Tuesday.
KamaAina
(78,249 posts)Trust Buster
(7,299 posts)In Texas alone, she beat Sanders by 45 percentage points with the Hispanic demographic. Hanging your hat on a small caucus distorts the larger perspective.
Red Oak
(697 posts)Thanks for posting.
My eye opening experience this primary season has been to finally see just how complicit the corporate owned media is in picking our candidate.
The only good thing about this censorship action is that one can plainly see right now who reports objectively, even if they report "against" your candidate, and to note those who do not. Those that do not report, but rather spew, an example would be Tweety, have gone on my permanent "ignore" list. They obviously spout whatever they are told to spout. I will no longer watch them nor do anything to help them earn a living or the channels that hire them.
Bernie is a brave man to go against the Corporation.
chapdrum
(930 posts)Enough said.
wyldwolf
(43,865 posts)I guess if Benji Studebaker says so...
chapdrum
(930 posts)of objectivity - that is for damn sure.
George II
(67,782 posts)Dont call me Shirley
(10,998 posts)Mike Nelson
(9,903 posts)"Many media outlets clearly like Hillary Clinton and dislike Donald Trump"
silvershadow
(10,336 posts)beachbum bob
(10,437 posts)Delegates....one more step to nomination...
Chelsea2032
(38 posts)could get interesting.
Garrett78
(10,721 posts)Clinton won the popular vote by a hair in '08 and lost the delegate count by a hair. So, I'm not sure why the author would suggest it wasn't actually close. It couldn't have been much closer. This year will not be close.
At this point, Clinton is more of a lock than Trump, believe it or not. Thanks in large part to the fact that Republicans have winner-take-all primaries and Democrats don't. So, the Republicans running against Trump may be able to prevent Trump from winning a majority of delegates even if they can't prevent him from winning a plurality. Much hinges on what happens in Florida (where Rubio could win) and Ohio (where Kasich could win). But on the Democratic side, even in the states where Clinton might lose, she'll still win a portion of the delegates. And the states where Sanders is more likely to win or has won are states with relatively few delegates (Nebraska, Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont, etc.).