'Nobody Nominated in Modern Era Lost Both Iowa & New Hampshire'... uh oh

[tomm2thumbs]

No wonder there is a full-fledged panic going on in some circles...

PBS News Hour discussion on both Republican & Democratic candidates. If you want to jump over the Trump v. Cruz v. Rubio chatter, you can skip to 8:00 into the video for discussion on the Democrats, but I find it fun to hear how the GOP establishment is pulling their collective hair out trying to figure out how to pick a candidate in a smoke-filled room when there are people watching.

[TrollBuster9090]

1. I'm not sure "Nobody ever..." applies anymore.

After all, nobody in the modern era has ever won the Republican nomination by dropping his pants, shoving a trumpet up his ass, and playing The Gladiator March, until NOW....



Nevertheless, I agree with everything Bobo Brooks said about the Clinton campaign.

[draa]

2. I'll add this here as well.

How many candidates have lost in both the Iowa caucus and the New Hampshire primary before going on to win their party’s nomination and eventually the presidency?

FULL ANSWER


Since the Iowa caucus and New Hampshire primary came to national prominence as the first two contests in the modern presidential nomination system in 1972, the only candidate to lose both and go on to win the presidency is Bill Clinton.

In 1992, Clinton garnered only 2.8 percent of the caucus vote, which was won by Sen. Tom Harkin of Iowa. Because Harkin had a clear home-state advantage, other candidates passed up Iowa that year, making New Hampshire the first real voter test of the Democratic field. But Clinton also lost the New Hampshire primary, to Sen. Paul Tsongas from neighboring Massachusetts. Clinton eventually recovered in time to win the Democratic nomination, dubbing himself the "comeback kid."

http://www.factcheck.org/2007/12/bill-clinton-lost-iowa-and-new-hampshire-primaries/

Bill Clinton is the ONLY candidate to do it and at the time his favorables were very positive. People liked Bill Clinton. They wanted to have a beer with Bill Clinton. Hillary, not so much. That alone will make it damn near impossible to come back from losing the first two states. If you add in her turning her back on medicare for all and free college tuition and Bernie's overall platform then it's not going to end very well.

[CSStrowbridge]

3. Modern era is...

Modern era is what? 50 years, or 13 elections. It's hardly a representative sample.

Furthermore, she's ahead of Bernie Sanders in Iowa.

http://elections.huffingtonpost.com/pollster/2016-iowa-presidential-democratic-caucus

[pnwmom]

4. Since when is Bill Clinton's presidency not part of the modern era?

I'd like to know which Dems have won the nomination without a majority of the African American vote.

[CSStrowbridge]

5. Yep.

If Hillary Clinton loses two of the whitest states in the Union, but then wins Nevada and South Carolina, she will very likely win Super Tuesday and then put enough distance between her and Bernie Sanders that the contest will never be in doubt after that.

[Spitfire of ATJ]

8. Hillary won all of the big states in 08....

The strategy was to win all of the "blue" states.

Obama went after all 50 and the math gave him the win.

The Clinton campaign is actually BRAGGING about the use of "super-delegates". Let's be crystal clear - A super-delegate is someone who can ignore the will of the people. They can tear up the official results of an election or a caucus. Think the electoral college is bad? Super-delegates expose the illusion of democracy. It is the most obvious example of a corrupt system which needs to be eliminated.

[dsc]

6. Yes we didn't have cars or trains or planes

way back in 1992. what utter dumb asses.

[Spitfire of ATJ]

7. Nothing like watching people with seven figure incomes discuss our choices.