When Hillary was "inevitable," was she planning to lose NH, CO, MN, OK, VT, NE, KS, ME, MI, UT, ID?

[Vote2016]

Bill Clinton is rightly beloved in the Deep South as the kid from Hope, Arkansas, who won a Rhode scholarship to Oxford and went on to win the Presidency. Hillary Clinton is rightly beloved in the Deep South as Arkansas' former First Lady who has fought side by side with Bill as his "two for the price of one co-president" and for all she has done since.

Of course Hillary did well in the Deep South. You need not place a phony racial story line on this fact.

Hillary has a Southern accent (when she's speaking in the Deep South) and Sanders has a distinct Brooklyn accent no matter where he speaks. You don't need to fabricate a phony racial construct on this primary to guess which candidate's accent is more welcome in the Deep South.

The Bible Belt is the most Christian-church-going region (and also the region least progressive in accepting GLBT and reproductive rights as a result). Hillary is the least progressive candidate who talks about her Christian faith when campaigning in the Bible Belt. Sanders is a progressive Jewish candidate, but doesn't wear this Jewish identity on his sleeve no matter where he campaigns. A fake racial meme is unnecessary to predicting which candidate will have more appeal in the Bible Belt.

Leaving race aside, Hillary won all 13 states of the Deep South and you don't need race as a mental crutch to understand that.

By the end of the day, however, Hillary will likely have lost over two thirds of of the states outside of the Deep South (she has already lost 11 states, Illinois was a delegate tie, Sanders is favored in 3 more states today, and she won - mostly narrowly - 6 states).

When do we analyze this voting pattern without someone trying to say "it's racist to point out Hillary's not doing well outside the Bible Belt"?

If Hillary underestimated Sanders and underperforms in the contests outside of the Deep South, when do we ask whether she's also underestimating the Republican candidates and why should we expect her not to underperform in a general election if we nominate her?

If Hillary's primary campaign has been weak and her supporters unenthusiastic and her predictions of running the table have been way off the mark, why should we expect these problems to vanish in the general election?

[Jackie Wilson Said]

1. Any response I could make here would be an instant hide.

[SidDithers]

2. 1229 to 933...nt

Sid

[Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin]

3. Darn that math

[Godhumor]

9. Shhh

We have a narrative to establish here.

[leftofcool]

28. You left out over 2 million ahead in popular votes

[onehandle]

4. +2.5+ million votes for Hillary.

So, cool story bro.

[timmymoff]

13. President Gore

had a plurality of votes. Oh wait.

[JoePhilly]

69. So we should have gone with Nadar?

[rock]

79. And Gore handily won the presidency

Oh wait, SCOTUS had not voted yet.

[oberliner]

5. She just won Ohio and Arizona

Both by pretty substantial margins.

There were more Democratic primary voters in those two states than in Idaho, Utah, Maine, Nebraska, Kansas, Vermont, and Oklahoma combined.

[brooklynite]

6. Of course, Clinton and her supporters never said she was inevitable...

...and she's been methodically campaigning for months...

...but whatever.

[Attorney in Texas]

12. There is a pretty cool feature where you can search prior posts at DU.

That feature disagrees with your recollection of the themes Hillary's supporters was pushing in 2015 (and early 2016).

[brooklynite]

14. Then it'll be easy to document, won't it?

[Bluenorthwest]

40. Let's start in November in an OP by you:

"Since comparisons to the 2008 Primary are popular, here's a map of the 2008 Primary results Can someone give me a compelling argument as to which States Sanders can win?"

Best comments in that thread:
"He'll win Vermont on Super Tuesday. He may possibly win New Hampshire. That's about it.Since Vermont is on Super Tuesday, I expect the race to last that long."
And
"Sanders won't win a single state.He won't even win Vermont."
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251802159#post3

Is it possible that Bernie will only win Vermont on Tuesday?
http://www.democraticunderground.com/110758778

It's a nice thought, but Bernie Sanders can't win
"He's a 74-year-old secular Jew who identifies as a democratic socialist. None of that bothers me as a liberal voter, but there's enough ageism, religious bigotry and reflexive horror at the idea of socialism among the broad electorate that, if he wins the nomination, Sanders would probably lose every state — even his home state of Vermont."
http://www.democraticunderground.com/12511099732

After Iowa and New Hampshire, Bernie is in trouble
Minnesota (94 delegates) – poll in January – Hillary +35
Oklahoma (42 delegates) - poll in November – Hillary +35
Utah (3/22 – 28 delegates) – poll in January – Hillary +10
http://www.democraticunderground.com/110739092

We could do this all day. All day.

[brooklynite]

44. Seriously?

To state an opinion about how long a candidate will stay in a campaign is to assert that they're "inevitable?

To state an opinion about a specific State outcome is to assert that they're "inevitable"?

There are plenty of posts saying that Sanders will likely win all three States today. How many complaints have you lodged?

[Logical]

56. You look a little silly now! nt

[noiretextatique]

61. Very silly

I have another post from this poster. I am saving it for a rainy day.

[Logical]

55. +1000, good catch! nt

[Sheepshank]

35. That same search feature would also reveal that only BS supporter claimed 50 state wins nt

[Logical]

54. LOL, really? None of them? nt

[Logical]

58. Well, you did in this post.....

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1014&pid=674086

But she IS inevitable..because you folks are doing nothing.

LOL, I guess you were wrong AGAIN!

[Armstead]

86. ooops

[Segami]

7. By my count, that makes it TWICE that she has underestimated her opponent...

Barack Obama gave her a tutorial on the expression "...never let them see you comin'..." Someone should remind Hillary to stop using her 'snooze button' when the 3am call keeps coming in....

Bernie warned everyone from day one....

“..Don't underestimate me. We're going to do better than people think. And I think we got a shot to win this thing...”

So, Hillary is the 'Ready from day one to be Commander in Chief' we should be trusting?

[Attorney in Texas]

8. Hillary 2016 is a MUCH weaker candidate than Hillary 2008. She's become an invitation to Pres. Cruz

[JoePhilly]

24. Cruz won't win the GOP primary.

[JonLeibowitz]

29. You don't need to win the primary to be the nominee (brokered convention)

[JoePhilly]

30. That would destroy the GOP. So I hope it happens.

But Cruz would still not be the nominee.

He's a theocratic crack pot and moderate Republicans know it ... that's why he's losing now.

[Attorney in Texas]

36. Expect the Republican establishment to justify depriving Trump of the nomination with a Cruz-Kasich

or maybe a Kasich-Cruz ticket based on the justification that Cruz delegates plus Kasich delegates are more than Trump delegates. Trump currently has about 130 more delegates than Cruz + Kasich, but the Republican establishment goal is to fight the race not to overtake Trump (because they can't) but to keep him below Cruz + Kasich so they can have some justification for saying the "ticket" got more delegates than Trump.

They would prefer to run the ticket as Kasich-Cruz, but I'm not sure they can bully Cruz into that. If they do run as Kasich-Cruz, we lose lose with Hillary and it would be a close win with Sanders. If they run the ticket as Cruz-Kasich, Sanders would win more easily and it would be close with Hillary. I think both Sanders and Hillary ought to able to beat Trump. Hillary's game plan seems to be "even I'm less unpopular than Trump" - that's not a general election strategy.

[JoePhilly]

38. Trump would split off with his insane supporters.

[Attorney in Texas]

39. No. With Trump, EVERYTHING is negotiable. Will the price be a French ambassadorship for Ivanka?

A Slovenian ambassadorship Melania? Will the Koch brothers or another Republican mega-donor make a campaign donation to the Trump campaign to erase all of his campaign expenditure debt? Will Trump be the one who insists that it must be Kasich-Cruz so he can take credit for being the kingmaker and exact revenge against Cruz?

If Trump is going to lose, he will look for whatever he can get in exchange for his loss. The closer Trump comes to winning the nomination, the higher the price will be, but everything is for sale in Trump's world.

[deathrind]

52. I agree 110% with your theory here.

It would not surprise me in the least if this was Trumps true objective to start with. I think it is possible he is as surprised as the rest of us at how well he has done so far. I think you are also right on target about the scaling price structure the farther he goes to get him to step aside.

[Atman]

77. ^^THIS^^

Drumpf is only in it for Drumpf. If he can make a deal he will, and he'll walk away calling himself victorious, a winner. Essentially saying "I meant to do that!" It's totally plausible.

[mythology]

65. What does that say about the guy who is losing to her?

If Sanders is such a stronger candidate, why can't he make the case? He's further behind in pledged delegates than Clinton ever was in 2008 and he's well over 2 million ahead in the popular vote.

If she's a much weaker candidate, why isn't Sanders even close much less way behind?

[Attorney in Texas]

80. Sanders is pushing the entire weight of the moribund Democratic Party back to the FDR legacy kicking

and screaming.

When DWS can take time away from her effort to push anti-consumer loan sharky payday extortionist loans, she's committing the entire weight of the DNC to stop Sanders, but -- still -- he is winning state after state after state.

When Wall Street isn't helping Hillary hide her millions of dollars of speech transcripts, Wall Street is funding SuperPACs to buy Hillary every campaign advantage, and -- yet -- Sanders is breaking turnout records without a SuperPAC.

When M$M can take a moment away from its breathless Trump vs. Clinton speculation, they still cannot find the time to fairly cover the Sanders campaign, and -- despite this -- Sanders' polling numbers continue to rise.

You ask why Sanders isn't doing better? You should share my amazement that Sanders has overcome so many obstacles to keep the people's campaign in such strong contention.

[Hortensis]

10. maybe not so many, but yes.

The GOP started running her for president back in 2008 as a major part of their strategy for defeating her in 2016. They never let a week go by without attacking her, usually with despicable smears and investigations, and pointing out that she was going to be our nominee in 2016, and wasn't that awful (and wouldn't we be incredibly sick and tired of her by the time 2016 rolled around?!!).

But that didn't happen. We were sick and tired of the GOP, but she came into 2015 with people already long used to the idea of a woman president and she herself still extremely popular -- although, of course, with Democrats ready to also consider the inevitable competitors who would step forward.

We are doing that now, Sanders has some wins, and a majority are apparently choosing her anyway, perhaps with the GOP's unwitting assistance as it turns out. If so, thank you GOP! Lol.

[RandySF]

11. I was wrong about OK and Mi

But the rest went as I expected.And by the way, you don't get more "Bible" than Kansas and Oklahoma. And ID is pretty much ground zero for the black helicopter crowd.

[Attorney in Texas]

15. So have you been expecting all along that Hillary would lose a majority of states but get the

nomination due to super delegates?

That seems like a doomed path to nomination.

[RandySF]

18. No

Because she still has a lot of wins coming. And she's ahead in pledged delegates because Ohio is a bigger state than Nebraska. Just like Pennsylvania, New York and New Jersey are each far bigger than many of Bernie's states combined. Simple math.

[R B Garr]

37. Obama won the delegates; Hillary won the popular

vote. So she accepted the 2008 outcome. What seems doomed is to whine and suggest Sanders doesn't have to abide by the same rules other Democrats have.

[Bluenorthwest]

48. Your predictions, Oct:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251670018

[Jitter65]

16. No one painted her as "inevitable" except her detractors and the media.

I never heard her refer to herself as that.

[SheilaT]

59. Perhaps she herself has never said that,

but she's been presented as inevitable since some time in 2014. We kept on being told how much money she had, that no one else could possibly match her fund raising.

Of course, Jeb Bush got a huge early start in fund raising also, for all the good it did him.

We've been told over and over that Bernie can't possibly win, and he should drop out. Right. Just like she dropped out early one. Oh, wait. She stayed in to the end. Never mind.

[asuhornets]

17. The only people that said Hillary was

"inevitable" Bernie and his supporters. She is winning. Can't you even be happy that Sanders is winning some states? He may even all the states today, good for him.But his problem is that he does not have a diverse coalition.

[noiretextatique]

62. Of course he has a diverse coalition

Including Independents.

[workinclasszero]

19. 1229 to 933..NY,PA,NJ and more big diverse states coming up

And over 2.5 MILLION more votes for Hillary than Bernie.

The PEOPLE have spoken, democracy has prevailed.

What was your point again OP?

[Bluenorthwest]

42. Three States are voting right now and you claim they do not count, this shitting on States you don't

win thing is not very democratic, nor Democratic nor even American. To say the people have already spoken while the people are still in the process of speaking is simply flat out wrong.

[Jenny_92808]

20. I was just hidden

because i spoke out to say that RW speakers are harming us. We are being infiltrated by paid posters who disparage us.

[pdsimdars]

47. I have felt this for some time

Once I suggest the "pay" aspect and was immeditely hidden.
But it sure seems to be the case in some cases.
Why is that a bad thing to say?

I just wish they had given me some warning. I didn't know that was bad or I would have changed it.

[-none]

53. Ambushing people here is just so much fun for certain groups here.

It is a game for them. Makes them think they are somehow winning. Winning what though, is the question.

[noiretextatique]

64. As loudly as they complain

Hillary supportera also game the jury system here.

[Onlooker]

21. "Inevitable" is just politics

Both sides are engaged in politicking. On the Sanders side you have plenty of it: Hillary neocon, Hillary Wall Street shill, Hillary email scandal, Hillary ISIS, Hillary election fraud. On the Hillary side you have the same thing: Sanders white candidate, Sanders gun nut, Sanders unrealistic, Sanders Castro, Sanders Minutemen, etc. It's all part of the game, and the challenge for each of us to cut through the bullshit and try to think for ourselves.

[Beacool]

22. Again with the tone deaf attitude about the people from the South who voted for Hillary.

Sanders, with a couple of exception, wins the majority of young people, Independents and in predominantly white regions.

Hillary wins mostly primaries and in diverse states. She has also won the votes of the majority of registered Democrats.

So, you got a candidate whose base seems to be the young, whites and people who are not registered Democrats. You have another candidate who wins among registered Democrats, AA, Hispanics, etc.

Who really represents the Democratic party? IMO, it's Hillary.

[JoePhilly]

23. I like how you say ... "Leaving race aside" ... and then you return to it almost immediately.

Rather transparent.

[Logical]

25. Her team is shocked this was so hard. I am sure she is so pissed. nt

[Nye Bevan]

32. The fact that she has won over 2 million votes more than her opponent

may provide her with some consolation.

[Logical]

50. Bullshit and you know it. She is struggling. Tied in national polls. Terrible for her. nt

[thesquanderer]

26. re: "Illinois was a delegate tie"

Last edited Wed Apr 6, 2016, 08:18 AM - Edit history (1)

Not according to the totals from google, which gives Clinton 76, and Sanders 73. However, Missouri was a delegate tie. A couple of others were close, within 1 or 2... Iowa and Massachusetts,

ETA: Correction... Google's numbers are incomplete. Green Papers does show Illinois as a delegate tie (and Missouri as a 1-delegate advantage for Hillary).

[H2O Man]

27. Very good!

Recommended!

[Nye Bevan]

31. I think the word "inevitable" was only ever used here mockingly, by Hillary opponents.

Just like "coronation". Of course, if anyone has a link to the contrary I will admit that I am wrong.

[Sheepshank]

33. The only team that ever claimed a 50 state win was a BS supporter

....I think you are directing your question to the wrong campaign.

[RandySF]

34. At this point, she is inevitable.

She is at 110% of the pledged delegates she needs to win the nomination. The Clinton campaign doesn't care about losing a state here and there, especially when she still picks delegates up. She's playing the long game. And while Sanders supporters will dance in their living rooms about winning Alaska, Clinton 2016 is prepping for the general election.

[Bluenorthwest]

41. No, she has 1,223 to Bernie's 920 to secure the nomination requires 2,383 to have 110% of needed

delegates would require 2,621 delegates. This is very simple material. Outlandish statements are outlandish.

[RandySF]

43. Oops correction

She 110% of where she needs to be on track to a majority. But they are still prepping for the general election.

[Bluenorthwest]

45. You typed bullshit and got caught, that's what your crowd is getting known for.

As Hillary supporter bullshit goes lately, yours was pretty innocent, not antisemitic or pro Reagan or anything. So don't worry.

[RandySF]

49. No it was an honest mistake

Check my journal. I wrote in an op last night that she's "on track". And it's a known fact that she's pivoting to the general.

[pdsimdars]

46. Are you expressing the same doubt I had. . . . namely, what IS the definition of "inevitable"

[Gwhittey]

57. It depends upon what the meaning of the word 'inevitable' is.

IS that what you meant to say?

[MFM008]

51. Unless we stop

throwing feces at each other between HRC and Sanders , were going to have a PRESIDENT TRUMP or PRESIDENT CRUZ or RYAN or KASICH.

D I S A S T E R.

[Vote2016]

60. neither candidate has even shown a trailer of what the general election film will be like

[George II]

63. Some around here claimed that Sanders was going to win 50 states. He's already 18 short of that.

[Vote2016]

68. I only recall Hillary supporters as claiming she was "inevitable"

[George II]

70. You've only been around a month or so, you missed all the 50-state ballyhoo.

By the time you signed up here Clinton had already lost Iowa, no 50-state win after that.

[Vote2016]

71. No, I saw the Hillary supporters posting about a 50 state landslide, then the 49-1 landslide, then

the put-a-fork-in-him posts.

Maybe you missed those? (nope, you posted in those same threads)

[George II]

72. I don't recall ever seeing anyone claiming that Clinton would win 50 states.

[Vote2016]

73. why don't you look back at national polling discussions between Thanksgiving and Groundhog Day

[one_voice]

66. You want to leave race aside..

yet you mention race in some form 6 times. uh-huh.

Race & religion. Two pots. You're not as clever as you think.

[mythology]

67. Race isn't a mental crutch

It's a demographic reality. Sanders isn't just losing the black vote, he's losing the Hispanic vote and women's votes. Those are three of the core constituencies of the Democratic party. Sanders is winning younger voters which make up a fourth core. But 3 is usually bigger than one.

It's not because the states are in the south as you may recall she lost those same states in 2008 to Obama because he won the black vote. Clinton was just as from Arkansas, just as married to Bill then. So please kindly take your suggestion that race is a crutch and toss it in the garbage where it belongs.

He's losing those groups because for whatever reason his message isn't resonating with those groups on average.

And if her campaign is "weak and her supporters unenthusiastic" why is she beating Sanders by such wide margins in terms of delegates and the popular vote? Does that make Sanders campaign weaker and his supporters even more unenthusiastic?

If Sanders can't win the votes of women, Hispanics and blacks can we ask if he can win them against Republicans?

[Vote2016]

74. You are mistaken about the Hispanic vote but - even if you were correct - Hillary's lost 14 states

plus Democrats Abroad.

How would that be possible if you were correct (unless your effort to insert race into an ideological disagreement implies white voters can't stand Hillary) ?

[libdem4life]

76. I think there is already reason to believe that is possible...

using just numbers and matchups with Republicans. "Socialist" is no longer a Marxist meme...even among older folks. They have learned that much of what we/they depend on is Socialism.

One good example...Privatizing big whatevers profits, then socializing the losses...Bailouts and the like.

Almost all of our government programs are "socialist". A majority would like for some of them to expand.So, that "dawg ain't huntin' like it did before. Bernie scores higher against any Republican candidate.

His NRA rating is a dismal D-, so take out those two Hot Spots, and his chances are pretty good.

And to a lot of Americans, Bernie is still pretty much unknown. So, I look for an increase in percentages.

OTOH, the new email revelations (the FBI and NSA are not the Right Wing Conspiracy) and the Clinton Foundation woes lurk...Democrats are in denial or praying no one notices. The Republicans are not.

She doesn't have a chance in the GE. And even if she were to pull it out somehow...by hook or by crook...impeachment papers will be filed almost immediately. That, to me, signals a lame duck presidency at best, and a Regime Change, at worst. Unfortunately, the Republicans hate her even more than Obama and with Paul Ryan in there...not a good scenario.

ETA: I have read that Bernie has an 85% approval rate in Congress. That doesn't jibe with the Angry Old Man and the He Hasn't Done Anything memes floating around here. I don't know of many Congressfolk who make the daily news, let alone national news unless it's a scandal. Their job is to make laws and such.

[bettyellen]

75. She takes the more populous and diverse states. This is a bad thing now?

[Donald Ian Rankin]

78. No, but she could afford to do so and still be placed to almost certainly win. N.T.

[book_worm]

81. You all think just because he won some small caucuses where not many people vote

that you have all the momentum. Well, Hillary won 5 out of 5 primaries two weeks ago and won the Arizona primary a week ago. Bernie needs to show he can start winning in important primaries and not only in caucus states dominated by lily white voters.

By the way are Ohio, Arizona, Massachusetts and Illinois part of the bible belt? Why can't Bernie win states with significant African-American voters? If you're going to toss stones then we will toss them back.

[Sheepshank]

82. Bernie and Hillary both know where they are needed to spend money and time

As win doesn't have to be a blow out. Because Hillary lot in some Bernie strong holds, doesn't mean her strategy for a final DNC nod isn't still in tact and on tartget. I'd say her target delegates are within sight. And that is the bottom line, must she win by 300 or 25 to get the DNC party nomination?

She has a well oiled campaign machine and I doubt she is underestimating anything or any opponent.

[Orsino]

83. Gloating does not become us.

Particularly when we are behind.

[seabeyond]

84. Clinton is still inevitable.

[asuhornets]

85. They were mostly caucuses

Easy win for Sanders.

[Vote2016]

87. why is Hillary losing so badly outside of the region where she and Bill rose to power?

[thesquanderer]

88. Time to update this thread's headline with a whole lot more states!

(p.s. -- I updated/corrected my post #26)