Bernie Sanders
Related: About this forum5 Major Signs that Clinton is Losing Now
1. Nearly lost Iowa -- the inside the media story out of Iowa was that many there believed Sanders had turned out more support. at best it was a squeaker. Without the "win" in Iowa, the whole narrative falls apart and the story becomes Sanders gaining support as his visibility grows and as more people start paying real attention to the choice in front of them.2. Post-Iowa staffing and message changes --
...
From the beginning, [the campaign's top pollster and strategist Joel] Benenson was frustrated that he was forced to split his time between defending his boss on emails and defining a path for her candidacy.
http://theweek.com/speedreads/604429/hillary-clintons-campaign-reportedly-unhappy-hillary-clinton
3. Fighting to Retain your Base when You Would be Expanding It -- Team Clinton is fighting to hang on to women and blacks when, if she had solid support there, she would be trying to expand her reach. In recent exit polls we see younger women and younger blacks are more open to Sanders than their older counterparts. Telling women the will "go to Hell" if they don't vote for Hillary shows the desperation.
The risk of a bandwagon campaign is that people start to feel insulted and stereotyped as this man's reaction shows:
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/world/the-times/us-election-2016-hillary-clinton-loses-grip-on-young-black-vote/news-story/87fa74a04c5ca3093af0c09dddd19d76
4. Attempted Steal the Bern -- Adopting your opponents lines (as much of them as you can with a few modifications like her $12/hr min wage) shows that the speaker believes or knows outright that their opponent's positions are more popular than the ones they would put forth.
5. Trying for 3 Weeks to Stop the Momentum -- From the wake-up call that was Iowa to right now, they are still trying to stop the momentum. Trying to stop the momentum confirms one thing very strongly -- your opponent has momentum and you don't. They got a lot of MSM to tout the supers as being locked in to HRC and then pointed to victories in SC and elsewhere as evidence that the momentum was not real.
Colorado, Maine, Nebraska and Kansas just disproved that one.
djean111
(14,255 posts)I think her demographics are more like people who like war, people who like fracking, people who like Wall Street - you know, people who are cognizant of the actual issues. But wait, I am cracking myself up.
GreatGazoo
(3,937 posts)on everything. There is so much noise around HRC and she IS a lightning rod for GOP criticism and faux scandals that one reaction is to just shut it all out.
I think there is a segment within her supporters that identifies with her as a woman in a man's world who is fighting for all women and is unfairly attacked. Their bandwagon campaign plays to that -- it is a women have to stick together kind of appeal.
djean111
(14,255 posts)And that "women stick together" thing - nah. This woman will not ever do anything against my conscience, just because I am a woman.
jwirr
(39,215 posts)needs and having a woman president is at the bottom of the list. My family has a lot of needs and they are all important. Bernie is a candidate that speaks to all those needs.
Lorien
(31,935 posts)if I did I would be racist, sexist and homophobic!
Paper Roses
(7,473 posts)This old timer has seen it all. Been there, listened to that.
I've had it with the same old baloney. We must redirect our country. For me, there is only one choice. Not just for me but for my family and my country.
Go Bernie!!!
PyaarRevolution
(814 posts)Just close your eyes, let your mind blank and think of your vagina. /sarcasm
RiverNoord
(1,150 posts)I don't understand the psychology of it, but Sec. Clinton has a great many supporters who respond almost instinctively to any criticism as an unfair attack.
It could be the product of years and years of right-wing media practically institutionalizing attacks on her. Hearing people you loathe verbally abusing someone you like over and over again probably sets you in a particular mindset. Then, when substantive criticism of that persons candidacy for high office comes from other sources, I figure, for many, it is interpreted as 'they're right-wing nuts too' or 'how can they be so disloyal after she's taken so much punishment over the years.'
If there's something to that, it should inform us as we communicate with her supporters.
FuzzyRabbit
(1,967 posts)I think you are right on the money.
beltanefauve
(1,784 posts)And re: the "disloyalty "angle, it amazes me how many posts containing quotes from Her Royal Highness herself, facts, and left-leaning opinion, caution us to shhhhh! because we're giving ammo to the Republicans.
PyaarRevolution
(814 posts)Would like to expand on it. I think there's a segment of women who grew up at the same time as Hillary and can strongly empathize with what you just said but it gets worse from there. That same segment thinks that, by that logic, they should have to work so much harder than a man to match them. That sentiment is sadly true but in trying to excel and pass their male competitor they try to emulate the man's behavior, especially his bad qualities. This is the WRONG way to excel in the chosen field, even if it's a more masculine industry like politics.
Hillary trying to act tough has seen her do some truly stupid things, like twice supporting U.S. backed coups(I'm NOT calling it the polite term of regime change).
I wish more men in politics would embrace their Yin and I think Bernie does that to some extent.
GreatGazoo
(3,937 posts)Going around the world as a female Sec of State, to countries that don't accept women as equals alone should be proof of that. Beyond stuff like that I don't think gender has much to do with it.
I think the line between being perceived as too tough and too weak is extremely thin for a President. I think Barack does extremely well with it. His calm steady delivery serves him very well. Some people want to apply different rules to women and that makes that line even thinner if not invisible.
Side note: It seems to be the Clinton camp that called 'foul' last night when Bernie said "excuse me" and I am not sure that that would have been done or expected to play if Clinton was male.
Gwhittey
(1,377 posts)people who like war, people who like fracking, people who like Wall Street
OMG that is a Republican
SomeGuyInEagan
(1,515 posts)... and yet, here we are.
Gwhittey
(1,377 posts)Democraticunderground.com you would think this was a site with democrats, silly me.
AtheistCrusader
(33,982 posts)Which, ironically, is the only means I have to reconcile what people say they are, against what they actually are.
peacebird
(14,195 posts)Demobrat
(8,970 posts)Why pay attention to issues when you can make an easy decision based on gender? It reminds me of the people who voted for Bush because he talked like somebody they could have a beer with.
AtheistCrusader
(33,982 posts)with.
We need a better filter.
At least Bush The Dumber MKII fell out of the race already.
Demobrat
(8,970 posts)who talks like a good old boy! Let's focus on what matters here.
Carolina
(6,960 posts)I think they are willfully uninformed and don't care to learn anything about her record. Some also just want a woman but don't care that she's the WRONG woman
djean111
(14,255 posts)This time - I did my due diligence, am appalled that I did not do more research in 2008 - how could I have supported someone who stands for war, fracking, cluster bombs, Wall Street, etc? To think that I would, eyes wide open, just because we both are women is insulting.
I have worked for and worked with some wonderful women, and some women who were complete and utter assholes. Gender is not even on my list of reasons to vote for a president. Or anything, for that matter.
ChairmanAgnostic
(28,017 posts)That explains a lot about her debate performance. Interrupting, ignoring Anderson, refusing to stop talking, and generally acting like a spoiled brat.
Her pollsters told her she had to act more assertive and in control. Instead she came across as a real piece of work.
My partner is a big Hillarian. I, the opposite. As we watched the debate, even she said, "she needs to stop that. It looks horrible. Why be so rude?"
Svafa
(594 posts)CoffeeCat
(24,411 posts)Hillary's campaign in Iowa hinged on her "electability" and her experience. No one realized that this election would be overwhelmingly about change and rooting out corruption and establishment politics.
All she has left is that she is the most "electable." That's not support based on passion for her candidacy or her ideas. It's soft support based on a very hollow foundation.
Furthermore, her "untrustworthy" numbers are at an alarming high--69 percent of voters do not trust her. Her negatives are very high too. Much higher than Bernie's.
All of this--is why we will see the continued push for Bernie to exit the race. She is vulnerable, and they damn well know it.
She's got this FBI investigation looming over her campaign, dripping out a steady stream of bad news. The latest being that her IT guy was recently granted immunity to tell the FBI everything he knows.
The longer Bernie stays in this race, the greater numbers of people hearing his message. Furthermore, the states start to really favor him as the primary progresses. If he starts to win more states, her electability meme is decimated. Then, the wheels come off. We could see a surge of "buyer's remorse" which can happen with any drawn out primary.
That's why they'll pressure him to get out. Too bad. It's not going to happen.
GreatGazoo
(3,937 posts)I'm sure they would have loved to side-step the primaries altogether and just go into a GE race where Trump is so scary and horrible that she never has to do more than say "I'm a Democrat and I'm not crazy."
They didn't seem to have a good strategy to stop Sanders or even answer to the donor/transcripts/quid pro quo stuff. And now they are stuck playing the 'you're a woman so you HAVE to vote for her' game while they hope that Sanders' message stops getting through the MSM filters.
Populist_Prole
(5,364 posts)They're not third-wayers like the ones here, and they don't at all dislike Sanders. They mean well but they aim so low. "Go with a ( perceived ) winner". There's really no policy positions they are passionate about voting for her other than she's not a republican and they don't want to rock the boat.
The only time I've heard someone express some excitement stated "She's a GREAT politician!". Yay. Not exactly the most solid of metrics.
Fast Walker 52
(7,723 posts)BernieforPres2016
(3,017 posts)GreatGazoo
(3,937 posts)BernieforPres2016
(3,017 posts)GreatGazoo
(3,937 posts)Corey references simialr analysis from this guy:
http://mattbruenig.com/2016/02/28/is-elias-isquith-literate/
BernieforPres2016
(3,017 posts)Further demonstration that Hillary's numbers only go down and that Bernie can win people over with exposure.
It would be great if Bernie could show a trend like that with older blacks but it doesn't seem likely. Voter turnout among millenials of all races is going to be critical, and with social media I think it's possible. I am very encouraged by the stories and pictures from Kansas, Nebraska and Maine over the weekend.
beltanefauve
(1,784 posts)We haven't had enough Northern industrial or Rust Belt states vote yet. Bernie's message may resonate more. We shall see.
PyaarRevolution
(814 posts)The person who gave the Hillary speech where I was, it was terrible. I talked to another person and said the speech was so bad I was surprised some of her supporters didn't cross the line. I would've been embarrassed. As it was, I talked to someone after the Caucus who said she was majoring or had just take
Let me sum it up. First the lady talked about where she came from and the opportunities America had. That part was fine but then next she basically implied that things would be different with a woman in charge. HELLLLOOOOO?! Margaret Thatcher anyone? Lastly, from what I could hear she explained that she could afford her college tuition and some people couldn't and that was the reality so basically the meme was "Can't afford college? Tough shit". As it was, I talked to someone after the Caucus who said she was majoring or had just taken Public Speaking and that the lady hadn't prepared. I definitely agreed with this but she also thought the cheering when the woman said "Hillary, Hillary, Hillary!" went down the more she spoke.
starroute
(12,977 posts)Search on "hillary clinton loses grip on young black vote" and it will be the first result that comes up. You can then click through without hitting the paywall.
This works for a number of the major online newspapers.
thereismore
(13,326 posts)something!
That something is the heavy sense of foreboding that winter is coming!
Gwhittey
(1,377 posts)The poll show her winning every state from now on *
*: Based on Age group >65(75%)55-65(15%) 55-25(10%) 25-18(n/a) via Random Phone Calls
Viva_La_Revolution
(28,791 posts)while Bernie just has to focus on getting his message out. It must be exhausting for them.
GreatGazoo
(3,937 posts)She's like a tennis player with no back-hand.
BernieforPres2016
(3,017 posts)and Hillary was running around 10 feet behind the baseline trying to keep the ball in play.
MisterP
(23,730 posts)Ikonoklast
(23,973 posts)The Kochs are already pissed off and grousing about the money they are wasting without getting what they paid for, I wonder if the Dimons and Blankfeins are wondering if they too backed a loser.
jwirr
(39,215 posts)Lorien
(31,935 posts)just imagine what his numbers would be like if he got equal coverage?
GreatGazoo
(3,937 posts)Howard Dean got a lot of MSM exposure early. Some on the Right worried that he was "the Democratic Reagan" but perhaps Dean's reliance on the MSM, even as he utilized internet organizing, set him up to be killed by them. I have been thinking a lot about the "Dean Scream" lately and looking for how the MSM will try this on Sanders.
Obama took the internet farther. He seemed to come in under the radar for many but college kids were really pumped up about his chances and they proved to be correct.
Sanders is winning despite the lack of MSM coverage and their Swiftboating. His campaign has not relied on the MSM and the payoff may be that he is Dean Scream proof now.
HassleCat
(6,409 posts)It's more like not winning, or not winning quickly, or not winning decisively. She was counting on having it all wrapped up by now, and her supporters reminded us that Super Tuesday was the day we would shovel dirt onto Bernie's coffin. Then it was last Saturday. Now I guess it's March 15. As long as Hillary remains ahead by a significant margin, and has the super delegates under control, she is not losing. As long as Sanders remains a mathematical possibility, she is not winning, either. If Sanders should somehow get ahead, unlikely but possible, look for the super delegates to start breaking ranks. That would be a big, big deal.
Ellipsis
(9,124 posts)AikenYankee
(135 posts)C Moon
(12,212 posts)I live here and don't know anyone who is voting for Clinton. It's all enthusiastic Bernie voters that I hear from. But then again, most of my friends are musicians and artists.
beltanefauve
(1,784 posts)Establishment Dems here, not only the voters but the politicians too. Our Governor is in his '70s and doesn't want to see cannabis legal. (It's happening anyway ) Feinstein is around 78.Boxer is early 70's but retiring. Many of our Congress critters have been in office for decades. The state party is grooming younger office holders such as Kamala Harris and Gavin Newsom, but they are already entrenched.
This is the same reason why Massachusetts( my former state) was supposed to be such a lock for Hillary: older,Establishment Dems. But Bernie came within under 2 points of beating her. There's still a lot of time between now and June 7.
C Moon
(12,212 posts)going for Bernie.
So I think California may be a closer race than most are thinking.
beltanefauve
(1,784 posts)In fact, I'm a white female over 50, a "Hillary " demographic, but I can't vote for her.
noiretextatique
(27,275 posts)And the rest of the state
Betty Karlson
(7,231 posts)Great read.
tarheelsunc
(2,117 posts)Oh wait a minute, never mind!
book_worm
(15,951 posts)GreatGazoo
(3,937 posts)Enthusiast
(50,983 posts)Just imagine if there were no shenanigans!
Duckfan
(1,268 posts)...Kansas, my first question to you would have been, "what have you been smokin?"
Major Hogwash
(17,656 posts)Rearrangement of an old Glen Campbell song.
GreatGazoo
(3,937 posts)Trump is now (post-Chicago) attacking and smearing Sanders, thus giving the MSM his royal permission to talk about Sanders more.
The ultimate effect is to convince more Americans that the likely GE race will be Sanders vs. Trump. This is a major step in both breaking through the media's blackout and in eclipsing HRC. It vanquishes their old meme that 'Bernie can't win the primary.'
Since as the saying goes, "there is no such thing as bad publicity" by implication the worst thing is no publicity, or less publicity. The more Trump expects to see Sanders in the GE the more that idea will be propagated by the MSM.