Biden campaign says Iowa is not a must-win state

[highplainsdem]

https://www.politico.com/story/2019/09/03/joe-biden-iowa-super-tuesday-1479854

Joe Biden’s campaign on Tuesday said Iowa is not a must-win state on the former vice president’s path to the Democratic presidential nomination and signaled that the campaign is already “ramping up” its Super Tuesday efforts.

“Do I think we have to win Iowa? No,” a senior adviser told campaign reporters Tuesday in a background briefing. The adviser said Iowa, which holds the first nominating contest in the nation, will be “critical.”

“We think we’re going to win. We think it’s going to be a dogfight. … But we think there are several candidates in this field, there’s probably three or four, that are going to go awhile.”

-snip-

Biden advisers have said they’ve laid the groundwork in early voting states but “are now ramping up for Super Tuesday and beyond,” and they have no expectation other top-tier candidates will leave the race after the first contests.

-snip-

Still, the campaign downplayed expectations in first-in-the-nation Iowa as well as in the first primary state, New Hampshire, which borders the home states of Warren and Sanders.

-snip-

Advisers also said that, looking beyond the four early nominating states and the Super Tuesday contests, Biden has the best chance of winning Pennsylvania, Wisconsin and Michigan in the general election. An adviser then mentioned that the nation’s biggest swing state, Florida, is “always in the mix” and then mused about chances of winning in Arizona, Georgia and North Carolina, only to add Texas as more of an afterthought.

-snip-

Good for them. Iowa and New Hampshire get too much attention for such small, nonrepresentative states. And Iowa's caucuses make that state even less representative of the Democratic electorate.

[Skya Rhen]

1. It's a numbers competition. Biden will rack up the delegate numbers as each of our many states votes

and he will amass the most delegates, when all is said and done - which is what matters...

[LincolnRossiter]

2. It's not. The very white states aren't going to be the seat of his strength. He'll make his money in

racially and culturally diverse states and industrialized (and diverse) cities—especially with black folks in the South and cities, brown folks out west, and blue collar folks in the rust belt.

I would like to see him finish top 2 in Iowa and top 3 (preferably top 2) in NH. But Warren and Bernie should have the inside track on a New England neighboring state.

[BlueWI]

4. Iowa's not a blue collar state?

OK.

States don't matter if they're "very white"?

Or if they're rural with fewer metropolitan cities?

Ok then.

But they still have two U.S. senators, right?

And we're still the "big tent" party all about inclusion?

Just had to check. : )

[treestar]

5. The don't matter more

there are posters going on about it and momentum winning there creates as if Iowa is a super-chooser of our nominee.

[BlueWI]

7. People like news that's favorable to their preferred candidate.

And Iowa has helped to raise the profile of lesser known candidates, as recently as 2008 and 2016.

If Biden had a wide lead in Iowa, how do you think the spin would be different from the same posters?

Plus, there's plenty of blue collar industries in Iowa. It's a whisker away from being a purple state again. So we shouldn't be minimizing its importance for the sake of one candidate.

[treestar]

13. I don't see any minimizing

Just maximizing.

[LincolnRossiter]

8. "Not the seat of his strength" equals "don't matter" in your mind?

I’m simply saying they aren’t bellwethers for Biden’s strength as a candidate. If he pulled off wins, it would be huge because he’d have won over states whose demographics (according to every poll) favor Sanders and Warren. If he competes but doesn’t win, he’s well positioned to steamroll the field in states in which he has demographic and electoral advantages.

But now that you mention it, far from “not mattering,” Iowa and New Hampshire matter way too goddamn much. You’d be hard pressed to find two states less representative of the country as a whole, yet they have this outsized influence over the election for the highest office in the land.

If you’re as passive aggressive in real life as your post, everyone secretly hates you.

[BlueWI]

9. All right.

Everyone secretly hates me. So sad.

The idea of a "very white state" needs to be questioned, especially if we fashion ourselves to be a big tent party POC live in these states and their presence and voices shouldn't be marginalized. I'm also sick of Democrats losing winnable races because of frontrunners failing to compete in lesser populated states. Every state matters.

Iowa favors retail politics, winning elections one door knock at a time. It balances out states where finance and name recognition are outsized as factors and provides non-connected people with a chance to meet candidates. And it could change in the future, but at present, it's the structure of the primary.

What I'm tired of is losing presidential elections because of dismissing the "very white states." The mindset needs to change, with the Biden campaign or whoever becomes the nominee.

Thanks for your insights, BTW!

[LincolnRossiter]

10. Glad you took my jab lightly. For the record, I'm not the type you'll find saying we shouldn't court

white voters (we absolutely should) or that we don’t need straight white men or old white men or any of that. We should be competing for and persuading every voter we can reach in every state and county (or parish) in this country. My point was that strategically candidates have to manage expectations and play to their own strengths. Every poll I’ve read suggests that Joe has some disadvantages in Iowa and New Hampshire that make outright wins an uncertain proposition—to put it mildly. He should compete, build a strong organization, and spend considerable time showing these voters love. And he may pull off the wins (his polling looks good in the first two contests right now). But the expectations game is a big part of the primary process, and he’s smart to recognize his potential limitations in these states. Warren and Sanders and Buttigieg would be wise to do the same in SC. Kamala and Booker won’t have that luxury (again, just political/demographic reality).

[Bettie]

12. We're in flyover country

some people think we shouldn't matter at all.

I'm in Iowa...so, I hear a lot of it too.

From Wisconsin though, grew up in Waukesha when it was a blue collar, union town.

[BlueWI]

26. I have enjoyed a couple of trips to downtown Waukesha.

It's trending towards being purple in elections these days!!

[Bettie]

30. Good!

All the people I went to high school with are dyed in the wool Trumpkins!

[BlueWI]

31. Yep.

It's still advantage Republicans but the margin isn't so lopsided. That's one of the keys to the state election wins for Democrats lately.

[Rstrstx]

3. I would think South Carolina is his must-win early state

If he can't win there he's in big trouble.

[Blue_true]

16. I agree, just like it was for Hillary, South Carolina is his firewall.

If that gets breached, particularly by Warren, Biden is likely done. Anyone else, Biden still can win the nomination.

[Cha]

6. I hope Biden wins anyway!

[highplainsdem]

14. So do I, Cha!

[myohmy2]

23. I don't...

https://berniesanders.com/issues/

...

[DrFunkenstein]

11. A Few Weeks Ago, Biden Campaign Became Biggest Staff in Iowa

Biden and Harris make a big play for Iowa, but Warren is months ahead
08/09/2019

As recently as June, Biden was criticized for the infrequency of his Iowa appearances. And after a shaky first debate performance that month, the former vice president’s numbers began to slide, in Iowa and nationally.
...
His campaign staff is now the biggest in the state, with 75 full-time staffers on the ground, 60 of whom are field organizers. That doesn’t include another 20 unpaid Iowa "fellows," products of an eight-week training program for organizers. By the end of the week, the campaign will have opened 10 offices in the state with a goal of 12 by summer’s end and a total of 25 by the caucuses on Feb. 3.

https://www.politico.com/story/2019/08/09/iowa-2020-grassroots-harris-biden-1454499

Looks like Biden is playing the expectations game. Iowa has never been kind to him, so it makes sense to lower expectations to the basement despite ramping up his staff massively and greatly increasing his visits.

[highplainsdem]

19. 3rd paragraph of the article says they think they're going to win. That is NOT "lowerimg

expectations to the basement."

They obviously expect it to be close, which is only realistic. They can read the polls.

I don't think any campaign so far is claiming they're positive they'll win Iowa.

[DrFunkenstein]

25. "Still, the campaign downplayed expectations in first-in-the-nation Iowa.."

... as well as in the first primary state, New Hampshire, which borders the home states of Warren and Sanders."

The Biden campaign realizes now that they made a strategic blunder by putting so few resources into Iowa, expecting to cruise to victory. While Biden was schmoozing with the 1% for their contributions, Warren was exhaustively attending events all across the state.

[crazytown]

29. I believe Elizabeth's ground campaign is in the same ball park as Biden's

Unlike the other campaigns, they are keeping things very much under wraps. And for good reasons.

[Joe941]

15. His internal polls are probably negative so he is...

Bringing down expectations.

[Blue_true]

17. That is my guess too. nt

[highplainsdem]

18. The published polls have shown Iowa is likely to be a close race, so they'e being realistic.

At this point any campaign announcing they're sure to win Iowa would sound idiotic.

Everything the campaign staffers said, as reported in that article, sounds perfectly reasonable and thoughtful to me.

[SteveDallas]

20. Hmm, i've seen this strategy before...

Rudy Guiliani in 2008. Downplay the initial states and stake all your hopes on not being seen as a loser when you lose them.

It will be met with similar results.

[crazytown]

22. Wes Clark 2004

[DrFunkenstein]

27. Lieberman Had Joementum Following Skipping-Iowa Strategy, Clinton Nearly in 2007

But Lieberman's campaign was Joever by the time they got to South Carolina.

Clinton's staff floated the idea of skipping Iowa in 2007, but decided against it. After Obama won Iowa, her massive lead in her South Carolina poll numbers was essentially reversed by Obama only a few weeks later because the numbers were much softer than they appeared. Apparently, there was a big enthusiasm gap that reared its head after her "inevitability" bubble was burst.

Not that this could possibly happen to Biden.

[crazytown]

28. What we forget is HRC went on to win IN, MI, OH, PA

Obama chose his VP well.

[crazytown]

21. Discipline. This is why I support Warren's campaign.

loose lips sink ships

[Gothmog]

24. I agree with Nate

Link to tweet