When Hillary loses Iowa and New Hampshire ...

[left-of-center2012]

Will she want more debates with Bernie?

[ejbr]

1. I love your optimism,

but I would still ask "If"...good question, nonetheless.

[DisgustipatedinCA]

2. She already does want more debates. Check LBN.

Here's the link:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10141310964

[brooklynite]

3. Ah..a "sprited debate" can only occur on a stage answering questions from the "Mainstream Media"?

[DisgustipatedinCA]

5. Yes. Unless the head of the DNC is in your pocket and promises that her rules don't apply to you.

But I think we can both agree, that's a special-use case.

[brooklynite]

7. I thought there was this process where candidates met and talked to actual voters...

...and laid out policies which could then be compared.

Maybe I was wrong.

[DisgustipatedinCA]

8. Please use direct language. I'm not sure what you hope to achieve talking in circles.

To answer the question you meant to pose: in the article we're talking about, Clinton mentions wanting a spirited debate with Sanders. She did not specifically say she wants a debate within the confines of the stupid schedule that DWS set up. She didn't NOT say it either. She said she wanted a debate. Debates are usually best executed not via newspaper articles with competing quotes, but instead by having both candidates in the same room.

The debates must run really differently at salons.

[brooklynite]

9. Funny, we managed to get through nearly two centuries of Elections without debates

(excluding Lincoln-Douglas). I don't mind them, but I don't think the formal structure is terribly necessary.

[DisgustipatedinCA]

11. Well, maybe a good step one would be to get the head of the DNC to stop the draconian bullshit.

You've seen the threats issued by Debbie Wasser-Name.

[brooklynite]

14. "Threats"?

Must have missed them.

[DisgustipatedinCA]

17. You didn't miss them. And we're done for now.

I appreciated the direct langage for the couple of posts it lasted. But when you begin feigning things with a silent G, I'm out.

[ljm2002]

29. So you're not counting...

...the 40 years between 1976 and the present? And the 1960 Presidential debates between Kennedy and Nixon?

Well all rightie then.

[Motown_Johnny]

16. Nope, you have got that right...

[brooklynite]

34. The problem with this (and I've been to a Sanders rally) is that nobody gets to talk back.

No Q&A; no chance to raise issues.

But I guess that was good enough for the Dean campaign.

[Fawke Em]

36. That's true of all rallies, but Bernie has never been shy about

answering questions at town halls and on media talk shows. He was on Thom Hartmann nearly every Friday for 10 years answering real questions from real people.

[Motown_Johnny]

39. There are worse problems

[Motown_Johnny]

12. Oh Noes.. "Mainstream Media"! You know, the ones who keep claiming she wins the debates

which is exactly the opposite of what every focus group has found to be true.



When Clinton supporters are turning on the MSM you know they are getting desperate.

[Punkingal]

4. Don't forget Nevada.....

[brooklynite]

6. When Bernie wins Iowa and New Hampshire...

What happens then?

He's been campaigning for nine months, and has been rising in the polls gradually. Once New Hampshire is over, we immediately shift to Nevada in two weeks, then South Carolina and then Super Tuesday. ten States nationwide. In none of these locations is Sanders anywhere close to his numbers in IA and NH, and there won't be significant time to shift them.

[Motown_Johnny]

13. Some polls have him leading in Nevada.

South Carolina will be much tougher, but if he wins the first three he may be able to come close in S.C..

At that point the momentum will be on his side going into Super Tuesday.


We do the first four states for a reason. IF Hillary does poorly in those first four contests the entire shape of the race changes.

[left-of-center2012]

18. IF Hillary does poorly in those first four contests

She'll settle for an office on Wall Street

[Godhumor]

25. What poll shows him leading in Nevada? N/t

[snoringvoter]

15. Nope, let's wait she loses her firewall states on March 1st, then we'll talk

She has to sign a declaration of non-retaliation and free the superdelegates to re-endorse Clinton or go for Sanders.

[oberliner]

19. Bill lost Iowa and New Hampshire

Still worked out OK for him.

[morningfog]

20. Sure, he lost to two different candidates in a crowded field.

Losing to first two states in what is essentially a two way race creates a different narrative: Bernie would have that ever coveted "momentum."

[oberliner]

21. Agreed

It would be very good for Bernie if he won those two states, but I don't think it means the end for Hillary. She could still bounce back with a strong showing in SC and the other southern states. At the same time, it could lead to some serious momentum behind Sanders, or even someone else deciding to jump into the race.

[Robbins]

28. reminder

In 1992 all the other candiates conceded iowa to Tom Harkin so bill didn't compete in Iowa and lose.

In NH after gennifer flowers and drugs and draft dodging allegations he finished a strong second and was able to spin that as a win.

In national polls Jerry Brown in late 1991 was ahead after mario Curomo declined to run.

You can't be frontrunner and then lose both Iowa and NH

[EffieBlack]

38. I don't agree

Iowa and New Hampshire are two of the least diverse states in the country - they should not be the sole or even the principal determinants of the outcomes of the primaries. As an African American, I would deeply resent it if the party's nominee was selected largely by a small segment of my party before anyone looking like me got a chance to weigh in.

Now, if a candidate loses both of Iowa and New Hampshre AND the next contests in states that are more reflective of the party and the nation, that's a different story. But to allow a small sliver of a sliver of the electorate to decide who the rest of the electorate can vote for is not only anti-democratic, it's foolish.

FYI, that applies regardless who the candidate is.

[ljm2002]

30. Well, to borrow a phrase...

...Hillary is not Bill. She is not nearly the natural campaigner that he is.

[Robbins]

35. I agree with you

she isn't the campaigner he is.Bill has the charisma that can get you to vote for him.

[Gothmog]

22. Even if Sanders win in Iowa and New Hampshire, he will not be the nominee

Even if Sanders wins both Iowa and New Hampshire, it is unlikely that he will be the nominee http://fivethirtyeight.com/datalab/bernie-sanders-new-hampshire/

So why do I still think Sanders is a factional candidate? He hasn’t made any inroads with non-white voters — in particular black voters, a crucial wing of the Democratic coalition and whose support was a big part of President Obama’s toppling of Clinton in the 2008 primary. Not only are African-Americans the majority of Democratic voters in the South Carolina primary (a crucial early contest), they make up somewhere between 19 percent and 24 percent of Democrats nationwide. In the past two YouGov polls, Sanders has averaged just 5 percent with black voters. Ipsos’s weekly tracking poll has him at an average of only 7 percent over the past two weeks. Fox News (the only live-interview pollster to publish results among non-white voters in July and August) had Clinton leading Sanders 62-10 among non-white Democrats in mid-July and 65-14 in mid-August. Clinton’s edge with non-whites held even as Sanders cut her overall lead from 40 percentage points to 19....

But even if you put aside those metrics, Sanders is running into the problem that other insurgent Democrats have in past election cycles. You can win Iowa relying mostly on white liberals. You can win New Hampshire. But as Gary Hart and Bill Bradley learned, you can’t win a Democratic nomination without substantial support from African-Americans.

Iowa and New Hampshire do not represent the demographics of the Democratic Party and so will not help sanders

[JonLeibowitz]

26. Good to see that there is no point in Iowa & NH voting. You have it figured out. n/t

[Gothmog]

32. Sanders is polling well in four states with over 90+% white voting populations

These states are not representative of the demographics of the Democratic Party. Why would you think that Democrats who are not being represented by the demographics of Iowa and New Hampshire will care about the votes in these states? I hate to break it to you but Iowa and New Hampshire combined have about one-third of the number of delegates as Texas by itself.

I am happy to wait until Super Tuesday to see where the primary stands.

[Fawke Em]

37. The poster also quoted 538, which has had this election all wrong for months.

[Betty Karlson]

23. Interesting how we have silently replaced "if" with "when".

My bet would be on more mud, rather than more debates. DWS would never admit to such a huge mistake, and Clinton knows it.

[Gothmog]

24. What Happens If Bernie Wins Iowa and New Hampshire?

Here is another good analysis that agrees with Nate Silver http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2016/01/11/bernie_sanders_could_win_iowa_and_new_hampshire.html

What would not change, though, is that Clinton would remain the clear favorite for the Democratic nomination.

Even if Hillary staggers out of New Hampshire with her second loss in as many contests, she’ll still have the same massive advantages she enjoys today: the campaign and super PAC cash, the ground game, the endorsements, the pledged superdelegates, and the general support of a party establishment that won’t soon forget that her challenger is not technically even a part of the Democratic Party. An unexpected loss in Iowa and a less surprising one in New Hampshire wouldn’t change that.

She’d also have a chance to get back on her feet—and fast. Consider what comes next: Nevada (Feb. 20) and South Carolina (Feb. 27), two significantly more diverse states than lily-white Iowa and lily-whiter New Hampshire, and two places where Clinton currently enjoys massive leads in the polls. According to the RealClearPolitics rolling average, Clinton holds a 20-point advantage in Nevada and a whopping 40-point lead in South Carolina. March brings better news still for the former secretary of state, starting with a Super Tuesday slate that includes friendly territory in the form of southern states like Arkansas, Alabama, Tennessee, Texas, and Virginia. The rest of the month, meanwhile, includes several big, delegate-rich contests that she won eight years ago during her battle with Barack Obama: Michigan, Florida, and Ohio. Yes, Sanders could have the momentum this time next month, but it’ll be on him to to find a way to keep it as he heads into significantly more challenging terrain than Iowa or New Hampshire, which were always going to offer his best chance at pulling off an early upset or two.

None of this is to say that Clinton has the nomination locked up already. She doesn’t. But if Iowa and New Hampshire are must-wins for anyone, it’s Sanders. Hillary can—and likely would—survive a slow start and still be the one standing on stage at the Democratic National Convention when the balloons come down this summer. Bernie, though, has no such margin of error.

Sanders is doing well in states with 90+% white voting populations and these states are not sufficient for Sanders to win the nomination. There are four states where Sanders is polling well in: Utah, Iowa, New Hampshire and Vermont. Texas has almost twice the number of delegates of these four states combined

[Yupy]

27. Is a myth that Bernie is not attracting minorities, Just Propaganda, he will surprise everyone!

I am Hispanic and I know a lot of Hispanics that are voting for Sanders and not "Mi abuela"... what a joke!

[Robbins]

31. there is polling which clinton supporters ignore

that shows his support has been going up among minorities

Bernie has blacks and hispanics who have endorsed him.

Nevada which not too many talk about could be real battle.

I could imagine sceniro where bernie wins iowa,NH,and Nevada and clinton wins SC.

[Gothmog]

33. Where is the polling that reflects this support?