General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsWhy Liberals Matter In Purple States
I currently live in Virginia, a state that has switched sides from Bush in 2004 to Obama in 2008. Virginia is what is commonly called a "purple" state; but is it really a place of centrist belief?
Short answer: No.
Long answer:
Virginia is a very divided state in terms of political dogma on both the left and the right. No one claims to be a Republican or a Democrat. Instead we label ourselves as liberal or conservative. I have a tea party neighbor whom I barely speak to because we disagree on every position possible. He's pro gun, anti abortion, pro military spending, anti marijuana, pro surveillance, anti Muslim, and pro America is founded Christian.
IF Hillary wants to win a general election, she needs to understand that third way and triangulation centrist policy doesn't work in a state like Virginia. A President, no matter what party, will piss off at least half the population in a state like Virginia; if not more. A centrist policy will piss off even more than half the population in this state. Those that vote Democratic Party will not vote for a centrist, third way, triangulating nominee in the GE. The left in this purple state are what some will call the "loud left" or a handful of other terms that paint us as fringe in our beliefs, but we are the ones who decide general elections, not the middle. Discussions within my group of friends have shown that nearly a 1/3 of what should be the Democratic base will not vote for her and either vote third party or skip the presidential race altogether.
This is not good news for Hillary. Her favorabity has already begun to slide. Yes, she might be sitting high in the polls now, but at this same time in 2008 she was 30 points ahead of Obama and her favorability rating had not begun to slide into what ultatimately went an upside down rating with her unfavorable rating higher than her favorable.
I do believe she can, and probably will, win the Democratic primary, she will more than likely lose in a general election if she refuses to acknowledge and begin fighting, with more than words, for us who are proud liberals.
People need to remember that just because a state can switch sides in an election, it's not because we have centrist positions, it's typically because we are deeply held beliefs in deeply divided states.
Thinkingabout
(30,058 posts)Is a centrist but she settles in the left side on the issues.
Exilednight
(9,359 posts)Actions do not match her words. Especially when it comes to the military and foreign policy.
Thinkingabout
(30,058 posts)Exilednight
(9,359 posts)Exilednight
(9,359 posts)When asked during a primary debate during tje 2008 election she was asked if she was a liberal, she stated she was a progressive, but completely ducked any mention of liberal.
JaneyVee
(19,877 posts)Edit to add: poll I was referring to is from April 9th 2015. There is no way she's keeping her big leads, that's a given, its a bit too early. Also, as a liberal myself, I agree that liberals matter.
Exilednight
(9,359 posts)Her favorability polls. Currently she holds a high 40ish percent favorability, but so is her unfavorable.
She has slid more than 10 points in the past year and a half, and this is all before Republicans start directing all their ire at her. Currently they have to concentrate on their own primary, but what happens when they all unite? How far will she slide then?
Erich Bloodaxe BSN
(14,733 posts)We're not really 'purple' either. We're a few major pockets of blue (major cities) in a sea of red small towns and rural areas. The key to winning Ohio in Presidential races is a candidate that excites voters and draws them out to vote. Sherrod Brown does that, but unfortunately for Dems, he won't be up for re-election in 2016, so the Presidential race can't ride his coattails.
Ken Burch
(50,254 posts)Especially if(as now appears likely)the Dems retake the governorship, which would take the possibility of a Gop'er being appointed to his seat if he's elected.
Worth considering...especially for HRC(she has a real obligation, if nominated, NOT to pick a "centrist" i.e., a conservative Dem)as her veep candidate, especially since there ARE no "centrist" Dems out there with national electoral "juice" .
Exilednight
(9,359 posts)Positives to a ticket. If anything they can be a negative depending on who it is. Plain brought down McCain in 2008, Gore really contributed nothing electorally to Bill and Wyoming was going to go Republican no matter who Bush II chose.
He'd be better served to decline such an invite.
JI7
(89,264 posts)Exilednight
(9,359 posts)She has to run in 50 states at the same time with a consistent message. What plays in Virginia might not play well in Pennsylvania.
She, also, has to shed her husbamd's shadow and prove that her policies will be further to the left on economic and foreign policy issues.
Tierra_y_Libertad
(50,414 posts)Response to Exilednight (Original post)
onehandle This message was self-deleted by its author.
jeff47
(26,549 posts)That was just a wee bit relevant to McAuliffe's victory.
Exilednight
(9,359 posts)People only look at the surface and refuse to dig deeper or apply a bit of crititical thought as to the how and why something happened.
Response to jeff47 (Reply #14)
onehandle This message was self-deleted by its author.
jeff47
(26,549 posts)Neon-blue cities, Neon-red rural areas.
2008, Obama got the cites to overwhelm the rural areas. 2012 he failed to do so.
I don't think a third-way-style campaign can get enough city turnout to beat the rural areas.
MFrohike
(1,980 posts)If you follow 74 west from Laurinburg, it's pretty blue until you hit Union County. Those counties were some of the very few to go for Dalton in 2012.
jeff47
(26,549 posts)I wanted to add a little something to an intelligent discussion of NC, which happens rarely enough these days.
Response to Exilednight (Original post)
onehandle This message was self-deleted by its author.
MisterP
(23,730 posts)(i.e., anyone left of Franco) if they win, or lose BECAUSE of them if they lose
it's a perfect loop
brooklynite
(94,727 posts)Politicians like to win. If they thought there were more votes on the left edge than in the center, they'd appeal to them.
Exilednight
(9,359 posts)Hillary on almost every issue and layed out a full blueprint of his agenda.
brooklynite
(94,727 posts)2008 AND 2012.
Exilednight
(9,359 posts)2008: he never pivoted away from his primary positions. He stayed on message with health care, doveish foreign policy, and a huge stimulus to jump start the economy again.
2012: Romney was never a serious contender. Romney ran away from his own health care bill, spoke hawkish and had nothing new to offer. Romney flip-flopped on almost every position and killed parts of the republican base when he said corporations were people. Obama took a slightly more centrist tone, but his actions were still to the left of his SoS on foreign policy, his stimulus was finally starting to kick in and although his actions were a bit more centrist, he could easily point to a do nothing congress as part of the major problem.
jeff47
(26,549 posts)he lost the "purple" state of North Carolina in 2012 after winning it in 2008.
And centrist statewide campaigns keep doing poorly (governor, senator, etc). Someday, the party might pick up on the pattern and stop assuming non-voters are directly in between Republicans and Democrats.
whatthehey
(3,660 posts)Not exactly a Debs clone.