Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumHillary Clinton about to campaign/speak for Alison Grimes
Coming up on Hardball..Chris Matthews.
Aside from what one thinks of Hillary, if her appearance can help put an end to McTurtle..i say go girls!!
InfoView thread info, including edit history
TrashPut this thread in your Trash Can (My DU » Trash Can)
BookmarkAdd this thread to your Bookmarks (My DU » Bookmarks)
6 replies, 1173 views
ShareGet links to this post and/or share on social media
AlertAlert this post for a rule violation
PowersThere are no powers you can use on this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
ReplyReply to this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
Rec (1)
ReplyReply to this post
6 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Hillary Clinton about to campaign/speak for Alison Grimes (Original Post)
misterhighwasted
Oct 2014
OP
DonCoquixote
(13,616 posts)1. she better have some magic
because of grimes loses, it will say a lot about Clinton's own "I run to Obama's right" strategy.
dsc
(52,162 posts)3. Win or lose this race will saying nothing at all about the wisdom of that strategy
in a nationwide run. No Democrat running for President will carry Kentucky barring a split of the anti Democratic vote (ie a three way race where there are two right of center candidates) and the status of this race won't change that basic fact.
Hawaii Hiker
(3,166 posts)4. Bill Clinton won Kentucky twice, Jimmy Carter won it in 1976
It's winnable for a southern Democrat..
dsc
(52,162 posts)5. ross Perot split the anti democratic vote
wyldwolf
(43,867 posts)6. Perot wasn't a real factor in Clinton's wins
http://www.salon.com/2011/04/04/third_party_myth_easterbrook/
http://www.leinsdorf.com/perot.htm
in 1992 Perot's presence on the ballot cost Bush: Montana, North Carolina, Colorado and Georgia. However, Perot cost Clinton: Florida and Arizona in 1992. So, in 1992, Perot cost Clinton 32 electoral votes while costing Bush 37 electoral votes. Bush lost by 100 electoral votes, so 5 more would not have given him victory.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x2441231
http://www.leinsdorf.com/perot.htm
in 1992 Perot's presence on the ballot cost Bush: Montana, North Carolina, Colorado and Georgia. However, Perot cost Clinton: Florida and Arizona in 1992. So, in 1992, Perot cost Clinton 32 electoral votes while costing Bush 37 electoral votes. Bush lost by 100 electoral votes, so 5 more would not have given him victory.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x2441231
Jackpine Radical
(45,274 posts)2. If she can help anywhere,
that's where.