Why Warren can not win the presidency

[Garrett78]

59. People continue to mistake "independent" for "swing voter" or "middle of the road."

Last edited Sat Sep 28, 2019, 03:11 AM - Edit history (1)

Studies have made clear that the vast majority of so-called independents are highly partisan voters who simply like calling themselves "independent." In fact, most "independents" are more partisan than the average party-affiliated voter was in the 1970s.

Furthermore, 2016 was not the result of Obama voters defecting to Trump. It was the result of suppressed turnout. Hundreds of thousands of Obama voters in key battleground states simply didn't vote, or they voted 3rd party. 25 years of Hillary Hate had taken a toll. Not to mention Russia, Comey, race-based voter suppression, etc.

The failure to understand all of that has led to this narrative that we need an old white male in order to defeat an old white male, that only Biden can win back those 3 states that had been won by the Democratic candidate for president each of the previous 6 or 7 presidential elections. It's nonsense, but for some it's become pure gospel.

Sanders has no chance at the nomination and probably would lose in the general. But Warren has a genuine shot at both the nomination and the presidency. I don't think she or Biden will be the nominee, however. Sanders hurts Warren's chances and I'm not sure she can do well enough among Black voters. But if Warren does win the nomination, I certainly think she can win. The biggest problem would be her insistence on doing away with private health insurance.

What I think will happen is that Harris will surge in Iowa and be able to take South Carolina once Biden fails to win either IA or NH. She'll then have a great Super Tuesday and go on to become the nominee. If that doesn't happen, then I think Warren has a great chance. It's too early to rule out Buttigieg, O'Rourke and others, though. The vast majority of people have not made up their minds. And we're still far enough out that the average voter isn't paying very close attention, especially with so many candidates still being in the race (the average voter isn't a DU political junkie and isn't going to bother trying to distinguish between 20 people they've never even heard of).

Anyway, how long Sanders sticks around will play a major role. If he loses both Iowa and New Hampshire, he'll have zero justification for staying in the race, which doesn't mean he'll drop out. He, again, has no shot at becoming the nominee, but he has enough of a following that he definitely has an impact on how others fare. Were he to drop out before Iowa (fat chance), Biden would be in serious trouble, as Warren would be a favorite to win both of the first 2 contests (if Biden fails to win either, his support will collapse). Again, though, I think Harris (or possibly someone else) will make significant gains over the next 4 months and may win Iowa. Klobuchar is someone who ought to do really well in Iowa, but I've never thought she would gain much traction due to a lack of charisma and the early reports about her being abusive toward staff. Booker, Buttigieg and Beto still have a chance to surprise. It's very reasonable to expect at least 1 candidate to surge in the coming months. Those who think the race will remain as is over the next 4+ months have not paid attention to history.