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
 

NCTraveler

(30,481 posts)
Wed Mar 16, 2016, 12:25 PM Mar 2016

How Hillary Clinton Keeps Winning

Obama beat her with the same strategy she’s using to pull away from Bernie Sanders.

After last week’s primaries, the story was Bernie Sanders’ massive upset in Michigan. Facing a Hillary Clinton victory in a state where he badly needed his message to resonate, he overcame a 20-point deficit in the polls to upend the narrative of the Democratic race. Suddenly, Clinton looked fragile against Sanders’ ability to bring thousands and thousands of young voters and independents to the polls. But missing from most coverage was a simple fact: Yes, Clinton lost Michigan, but she grew her delegate lead that day with a huge win in Mississippi.

We are primed to see national elections as a race for states—if you win the most, you win the election. That’s generally true of the race for president, where electoral votes are winner-take-all, and winning the most states translates to winning the contest. But the presidential nomination is different. It’s a race for delegates under a complex (and often inconsistent) set of rules. And it rewards candidates who can understand and game the playbook to their advantage.

We saw that in the 2008 Democratic primary—not with Clinton but with Barack Obama, who lost large states like Florida, California, and Texas, and either tied or lost the national popular vote (depending on how you count the Michigan primary). But the Obama campaign was less interested in winning states than in maximizing delegates in every contest. Where he had an advantage, Team Obama worked for landslides; where he was losing, Team Obama tried to fight to a draw or modest defeat. The result, after two months of voting, was a structural advantage. Unless Clinton won the lion’s share of delegates going forward (or his campaign imploded under some hypothetical crisis), Obama couldn’t lose.


http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/politics/2016/03/what_hillary_clinton_learned_from_losing_to_obama.html

5 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
How Hillary Clinton Keeps Winning (Original Post) NCTraveler Mar 2016 OP
How Hillary keeps Winning: More people keep voting for her than for Bernie Sanders alcibiades_mystery Mar 2016 #1
Yep Iliyah Mar 2016 #2
Great article Gothmog Mar 2016 #3
"Barack Obama, who lost large states like Florida, California, and Texas" BumRushDaShow Mar 2016 #4
Name recognition? Octafish Mar 2016 #5

BumRushDaShow

(128,738 posts)
4. "Barack Obama, who lost large states like Florida, California, and Texas"
Wed Mar 16, 2016, 01:47 PM
Mar 2016

and he also lost my state - PA. Which given the large black population here in Philly, was unable to offset the Clinton vote in suburban, small town, and rural Democratic areas of PA.



Meaning that the next go-around, given the coattails of Obama now tied to Clinton, PA will once more be in the "D" column in the GE.

Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»2016 Postmortem»How Hillary Clinton Keeps...