Clinton's Ohio women for Hillary event today was sparsely attended

[cali]

View image on Twitter
Follow
Karen Tumulty ✔@ktumulty
Not exactly a packed house for @HillaryClinton women's event in Columbus.

Yes, I think this represents the enthusiasm gap. I don't think crowds mean that much beyond being a rough gauge of grassroots support, but they aren't meaningless either. Hillary simply doesn't generate the excitement that draws thousands to see her. This event was well publicised and free. It was held in a 1,000 capacity room and it was less than half full. Oh well, she has 2 high ticket fund raising events there following this, so im sure she'll rake in the big $$$$.

http://www.cleveland.com/open/index.ssf/2015/09/hillary_clinton_leads_women_fo.html

[pinebox]

1. Info that cite numbers?

Maybe I'm missing it but I'm not seeing that half the room was empty??

[cali]

2. read the comments at the link. the author talks about it in detail.

[Fawke Em]

3. Which, again, makes me question polling methods.

I realize Sanders now leads in Iowa and New Hampshire (Yay! ), but, nationally, he's still showing far below her.

Is it that Iowans and New Hampshirians (? - Hampshirites?) have been up close and personal with the candidates and the polling is beginning to reflect that? Is that people in the rest of the country just simply aren't paying attention, yet, so they're picking a known-name out of the polling hat?

I know that huge crowds don't always translate into votes, but REPEATED huge crowds - everywhere - is far from meaningless.

Even the venerated Nate Silver and 538 have been absolutely wrong in their assessment of Sanders this year. They've called for his peak how many times now? Only to just be flat wrong.

So, is polling just completely outdated? Not all of these pollsters use only landlines. Maybe they need to start texting polls to recipients.

[cali]

5. I don't question the national polls and he simply

Isn't making inroads with minority voters.

[Dawgs]

8. Name recognition is real and many people (minority or not) are just not paying attention yet. n/t

[Fawke Em]

10. I guess I can't see why black people would ever

vote for her after the things she's said about Obama and because of the welfare and prison bills she supported stumping for her husband.

[LondonReign2]

14. I've asked the same question re her racist dog whistles against Obama

The answer I've received is "we've forgiven her".

I don't deny the poll numbers or that that is the truth (re forgiving her), but it certainly leaves me scratching my head.

[Fawke Em]

17. Well, it just means I have work to do down South.

I'm actually going to be in SC next month.

I live in Tennessee, but no one is paying any attention to us, yet.

[HooptieWagon]

23. Several points:

Both Iowa and NH are small states, and both are noted for responding to traditional retail campaigning...county fairs, town halls, shaking hands in a diner...the P2P type of campaigning that Bernie excels at and Hillary is uncomfortable with. It was only a matter of time for Bernie to take the lead in those states. Because his campaign is on a limited budget, Bernie has had to put a primary focus on those early primary states...thus many voters (including minorities) in later primary states simply don't know who he is. That will change as the campaign shifts to focussing on those states. He won't win every state...for example, Florida is noted for being difficult and expensive to campaign in, and the State Party is firmly in control of Third Way Hillary supporters. Sanders will do reasonably strong in Florida given his resources, but he won't beat Clinton. But I do think Sanders can win many other states than just Iowa and NH, and will in time pull in minority support more or less equal to Clinton.

[SouthernProgressive]

4. Looks like a great event.

Yesterday it was women in SC. A great speech on women rights last week. Keep hitting what is important and keep hitting the republicans Hillary. Republicans hate this shit. Hillary out talking about womens issues and calling out republicans. No progressive can be against this.

[SouthernProgressive]

9. I spun in no way at all.

It looks like a great event talking about a serious issue that all people should care about, specially progressives. I am quickly learning about the "new progressives" we have in the party. Substance just isn't your thing.

"Welcome to du. Have you enjoyed your first 2 weeks here? Interesting that you think you know more about du than those of us who have been part of this community for years."

I don't think I know more about this place than anyone. I have read the rules and have read the board for about two years. You make a lot of assumptions based off nothing. Why even make that comment? Anything to avoid discussing the importance of womens issues. My first post you replied to here was offensive in no way at all. You are amazingly passive aggressive, even when shown respect. My first post here was completely non-offensive. You immediately went into character assentation mode.

[Fawke Em]

11. Actually, substance IS our thing.

It's the HRC supporters here that seem to be campaigning on optics.

[SouthernProgressive]

12. It might be your thing.

It clearly isn't the ops thing. I didn't make any claim as to you on substance. Nothing about the op is about the substance of the event. Or Hillary and her roll out of women in support in SC yesterday. Or her great speech on womens rights last week. Completely void of substance. Then again, the comment wasn't directed at you. I am sure substance is your thing. It is for most Sanders supporters. I don't think the op is a Sanders supporter.

[beam me up scottie]

15. You don't think the op who is a Vermonter and has supported Bernie for years on DU is a supporter?

[cali]

19. personal insults with no foundation are clearly your thing.

But hey, if you want to continue embarrassing yourself, have at it.

[cali]

16. lol. many duers would disagree with you. I've posted substantively

and extensively on many issues- such as the tpp and the ISDS process. You have no idea what you're talking about. You're merely tossing off lame personal insults in a sad little fit of pique.

I don't know which post of yours you're referring to sd being non-offensive, but you have called me a liar and even when confronted with evidence, and other duers backing me up, you doubled down in a disgusting manner.

People who charge in here the way you have, often don't last.

And yes, I think Hillary's problems in the primary, including the enthusiasm gap, are substantive issues worth discussing.

[SouthernProgressive]

21. More passive aggressive and now bringing comments from another op in here to deflect.

Since you brought it up, you did not back up your claim as you said you would. My first post here was completely non-offensive. It is there for all to see. You immediately replied very personally and very passive aggressively. You debate in a certain style that is very unflattering and then project that onto those you are debating. Something that is taught in middle school debate class. You don't like the same verbiage you are all over this board dishing out. Since you brought it up, I'm still waiting on the "evidence" you claimed to have in the other thread. Not sure what that has to do with the glossing over of womens issues that you are doing here. I guess substance will wait another day to greet you.

[cali]

24. oh please. don't use terminology you don't understand.

I'm not being remotely passive aggressive.

And you are not the arbiter of what constitutes substance or an effective debating style. You certainly do like to thrash about though, without familiarizing yourself to the environment or the people in it.

Thrash on.

[SouthernProgressive]

26. It's this simple.

My original post.

"Looks like a great event. Yesterday it was women in SC. A great speech on women rights last week. Keep hitting what is important and keep hitting the republicans Hillary. Republicans hate this shit. Hillary out talking about womens issues and calling out republicans. No progressive can be against this."

Your reply to that.

"spin, spin, spin. she couldn't even fill the room.
And this feminist liberal doesn't support interventionist neocons like Hillary, no matter their gender.

Welcome to du. Have you enjoyed your first 2 weeks here? Interesting that you think you know more about du than those of us who have been part of this community for years."

You are correct about me incorrectly using the term passive aggressive. It is flat out aggression coupled with anger. Its pretty blatant.

[cali]

29. because your post was an obvious deflection from the issue,

which is, quite simply, Hillary's inability to attract enthusiastic crowds or generate grassroots enthusiasm. Yo u are free to post anything you like, of course, no matter how unconnected it may be to the topic at hand. And i am free to point out your spin.

And you said nothing even remotely substantive. It was simply rah rah stuff with a nasty little dig about how no progressive can be against "this". Of course, remarking on her lackluster campaign has nothing to do with being for or against her speech.

[SouthernProgressive]

36. The issue for progressives being womens rights.

"because your post was an obvious deflection from the issue"

No, you deflected immediately. Completely ignoring that she held a pretty sizeable event talking about womens issues. But no, look over there.

[Puglover]

45. Wasn't it just this morning a new arrival was demanding evidence

that you are being alert stalked?

Make of this what you will.

On Thu Sep 10, 2015, 03:51 PM an alert was sent on the following post:

oh please. don't use terminology you don't understand.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=583259

REASON FOR ALERT

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.

ALERTER'S COMMENTS

Accusing the poster of not understanding "terminology" in basic English continues a series of personal attacks she has made against this new member, who cali is furious with because she had the nerve to say something positive about the event discussed in the OP.

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Thu Sep 10, 2015, 03:57 PM, and the Jury voted 2-5 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Tit, meet tat
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Nah. Cali is not being alert stalked. Give me a break.
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #5 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: The tone of Cali's response is no more insulting than the post she replied to (or the rest of this subthread).
Juror #7 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: The last clause of the alert negates any merit it might have had.

[Major Nikon]

53. Results...

On Thu Sep 10, 2015, 03:51 PM an alert was sent on the following post:

oh please. don't use terminology you don't understand.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=583259

REASON FOR ALERT

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.

ALERTER'S COMMENTS

Accusing the poster of not understanding "terminology" in basic English continues a series of personal attacks she has made against this new member, who cali is furious with because she had the nerve to say something positive about the event discussed in the OP.

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Thu Sep 10, 2015, 03:57 PM, and the Jury voted 2-5 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Tit, meet tat
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Nah. Cali is not being alert stalked. Give me a break.
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #5 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: The tone of Cali's response is no more insulting than the post she replied to (or the rest of this subthread).
Juror #7 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: The last clause of the alert negates any merit it might have had.

[beam me up scottie]

25. And I'm still waiting for you to back up your claim about 90% of the board supporting Bernie.

[SouthernProgressive]

27. ok. lol.

[LeftOfWest]

38. Me too.

Thanks for your posts on this beam me up scottie.

enjoying it, and still waiting.



and cali got a bs hide in this thread imo.

[beam me up scottie]

40. It was a bullshit hide.

While nasty personal attacks on her were left standing.

Thanks for letting me know I'm doing something right, I wish I could have done more to help cali.

[polly7]

28. If you don't like how she debates, or her 'tone' offends you ......

don't read her posts.

Easy peasy.

Cali brings great threads on all sorts of important topics to this board and has for many years. You're so new, you probably don't realize how many great discussions come forth from her OP's, which are always substantive and informative. Maybe take a little more time before you attach on to a poster and follow them around with personal insults, it looks like you've already made her a target ... but, why?

[beam me up scottie]

31. To get her another hide.

And they succeeded.

But cali will be back, they're not going to shut her up that easily.

[polly7]

32. Wow.

That sucks. Hope someone is very proud of themselves.

[beam me up scottie]

33. They got what they wanted.

But no one is alert stalking cali.

[polly7]

34. They sure did.

I've always thought alerts should show the alerter's name and jurors should not be anonymous. That would fix a lot of it. We're all supposed to be adults here, we should be able to take full responsibility for what we do.

[LeftOfWest]

39. That was a bs hide.

ridiculous.

[polly7]

47. I agree. Someone really, really dislikes her threads on important issues but they can't

make them disappear, so she has to. Pathetic.

[LeftOfWest]

54. It is pathetic. btw...

I am reading you and beam me up scottie in a couple other threads today...you two NEVER get answers.

and you ask all the right questions.


MANY thanks to you both.

[polly7]

55. bmus is great at getting to the truth ...... sometimes I guess that's a bit too

uncomfortable for any real answers.

[SouthernProgressive]

62. Read my response again.

It's simply supporting Hillary. It was pretty basic and perfectly true.

[polly7]

63. Save it ........ she's already been timed-out,

so nah ....... no longer interested. You didn't answer my question, why would you expect me to go back and read anything you wrote?

[Hekate]

64. Don't quit your day job

[George II]

61. And again, welcome to DU, enjoy the site and discussions!!!

[leftofcool]

35. She was awesome!

[Lisa D]

44. Thank you for your post.

I appreciate it.

Although it baffles me how your inoffensive post--about Hillary denouncing Republicans--could produce so much vitriol.

[George II]

60. She's talking and MEETING woman, AAs, Hispanics, a cross-section of the population....

.....of the United States. She understands the constituency that she'll be representing as President a year from January.

[askew]

7. Yep, it's a huge problem for her.

This is the 2nd event in Ohio that had attendance issues. And she is having to book the smallest venues possible in Iowa to appear to be generating enthusiasm. Her NH event was also down-sized to a smaller venue.

There is a serious enthusiam gap with her.

[Fawke Em]

18. Here's a picture of the event.

I think I agree with the reporter - about 300.

[cali]

22. thanks, Fawke

I do not think this bodes well for us in the general if, as expected, she's the nominee.

[Ichingcarpenter]

30. women for Hillary event?..... seems there is more males or least

an equal amount of male vs female.

Pretty sparce

The 300 spartans for Hillary?

[frylock]

48. It would be rude for me to note the racial makeup of that group..

but I'm going to do it anyway.

[Fawke Em]

51. Well, the men you see front and center are the media.

It's hard for me to tell the makeup of the crowd beyond them because they're in the way.

[rainbow fish]

37. Recently had to downgrade all of her venues to make the crowd look bigger than it is

This is completely embarrassing for Hillary Clinton. It just shows the giant enthusiasm gap the size of Grand Canyon as compared to Bernie. Someone smartly observed that the "Women for Hillary" event was attended by more men than women.

I wonder how many of them were looking for dates?

Polls are already showing the equilibrium of the first two states. It will only get worse for Clinton as her support continues to drop.

[askew]

43. Holy Toledo Batman!

That place is empty. She's in serious trouble. Ohio is a Clinton country and if she can't get more people out than that she is going to lose.

No wonder she's brought out the old, tired arguments about anyone can give speeches that promise the moon and excite people. But, a real leader like Hillary can deliver.

[LondonReign2]

49. And she will deliver!

Goldman, Citigroup, JP Morgan, and Lehman brothers are counting on it.

[whatchamacallit]

20. By design

or something...

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

41. Results of jury decision.

REASON FOR ALERT

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.

ALERTER'S COMMENTS

Cali is the one who made personal insults because this new poster has the nerve to support a different Democrat for president. To then accuse the other person of making personal attacks is to compound t he insult.

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Thu Sep 10, 2015, 03:35 PM, and the Jury voted 2-5 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #2 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: Both Cali and SouthernProgressive need to have posts hidden. I'm doing my part here. This sort of name calling on BOTH sides is what makes DU suck.
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Tsk. Tsk. Squabbling in primary season on DU! Shocking!
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: How did this even get alerted? Is this another episode of the Alert Wars soap opera?
Juror #5 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: As far as I can see, this post is the one that escalated to insult. There may be others not directly involved to which Cali was responding. If so, they should also be alerted on. I vote to hide this one.
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #7 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given

[frylock]

52. The Bernie Sanders Alert Stalker Squad strikes again..

oh, wait. Three alerts on cali in this thread alone. Who's alert stalking again?

[CincyDem]

42. In a non-representative research study, conducted solely among my friends...

...HRC was originally scheduled to be in Cincinnati and she moved the event to Columbus for scheduling reasons. As I talk to friends around here, there's a common refrain - "I wish we had a different choice and I'm going to vote for the Democratic nominee". Remember, in Ohio we're late in the primary cycle (3/15). By the time the show gets here, we're pretty much left to sweep up the after party mess for the already decided nominee. So, in spite of being an important electoral battleground for the general, we don't get primary fever like a lot of places.

If, and I know it's a big if, we get to the point that HRC's most appealing trait is that she isn't a Republican, Ohio could be a trouble state for her - especially if Kasich is on the ticket somewhere.

My conversations were among some pretty staunch Democrats so I imagine (with no supporting data mind you) that more independent, swing voter types might be feeling more wishy washy about the whole thing and see Kasich as a good thing.

Again - only a small local group but nobody was too disappointed that HRC took a pass to head north.

Now before the Sanders bandwagon jumps on this, step away from the launch buttons. This isn't a slam on the Bern, it's more about the entire slate of choices. I have to admit, I'm still sorting it out for myself. I'm torn in a past, present, future discussion. I like him for what he is today (present) but I'm not sure he can win a general (future). I'm not so sure I like her past or her present but I'm a little more confident that she can take the general if she gets there. But I really like him.

So - like my friends, all I can really say about November is that I'm voting for the Dem since more worthy states (LOL) will sort out the primary field by the time I get a swing at the plate on 3/15.

[Fawke Em]

50. There's nothing to launch at you.

And I'm a Bernie supporter.

Your post sounds reasonable to me. I do realize Ohio isn't Iowa, but neither is Arizona or California and Sanders got a lot of attention in those places, so that's a minor quibble.

Still, the optics look bad amid the other issues her campaign is facing: her judgment to use a private email server, too-hawkish-for-the-base, DNC debates, a surging Sanders and what-have-you.

[CincyDem]

56. To clarify...

...Sanders gets attention in Ohio so it's not like his invisible.

I was more reflecting on the excitement (or lack there of) in general that exists about the political process during primary season vs. the General. This place is a zoo going into November. Have a friend who works at one of the local radio station conglomerates who tells me that they make 100% of their year in the 6-8 weeks running up to the Presidential election. And they charge 5x the going rate for air time.

The unfortunate fact is that by the time the primary train gets here, the nominee is virtually a fait accompli.

It's like baseball in Cincinnati (and often football). We have teams. We go to games. We enjoy the sport. We support the teams. But, knowing that post season play is a fantasy for the most part, you don't have rabid involvement because it just doesn't matter. It's just hard to get all excited about the primaries or the candidates at this point.

Interestingly, on the way home tonight I heard that HRC actually IS in Cincinnati now (9/10 @ 5:00pm) - at a high dollar fund raiser in the expensive neighborhood. So she passed up a public appearance because Cincinnati didn't fit with her schedule then she finds time to get here for a check writing party. I know ya gotta have $$$ to run a campaign but these guys have to get better at managing those optics you mentioned.

[Fawke Em]

57. Yep. Because even with Citizens United, money still cannot vote. eom

[ibegurpard]

58. No one reasonable can argue with you

You've expressed your opinions. You've not tried to pass them off as anything other than that.

[0rganism]

59. darn it she's doing things backwards again

it's like Lieberman's ad hoc party "Connecticut for Lieberman" or whatever -- insulting, even if it leads to victory.
she could try out "Hillary for Ohio Women" and see how that sits with people.