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
2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumHow Hillary Clinton Keeps Winning
Obama beat her with the same strategy shes using to pull away from Bernie Sanders.
After last weeks 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 statesif you win the most, you win the election. Thats 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. Its 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 primarynot 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 lions share of delegates going forward (or his campaign imploded under some hypothetical crisis), Obama couldnt lose.
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/politics/2016/03/what_hillary_clinton_learned_from_losing_to_obama.html
InfoView thread info, including edit history
TrashPut this thread in your Trash Can (My DU » Trash Can)
BookmarkAdd this thread to your Bookmarks (My DU » Bookmarks)
5 replies, 1159 views
ShareGet links to this post and/or share on social media
AlertAlert this post for a rule violation
PowersThere are no powers you can use on this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
ReplyReply to this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
Rec (6)
ReplyReply to this post
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
alcibiades_mystery
(36,437 posts)1. How Hillary keeps Winning: More people keep voting for her than for Bernie Sanders
Iliyah
(25,111 posts)2. Yep
Gothmog
(145,063 posts)3. Great article
It would take a great deal to stop Clinton
BumRushDaShow
(128,738 posts)4. "Barack Obama, who lost large states like Florida, California, and Texas"
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.
Octafish
(55,745 posts)5. Name recognition?
Libel is the other reason.