2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumWhy does Hillary do so poorly in the mid-west and west?
She has lost by some astounding margins. Why can't she connect with Democrats in the middle states?
For that matter, she has lost by some large margins in the northeast too.
I think the open question of the race is whether the Massachusetts results foretell those of the large liberal states.
We know Hillary will take the southern states, Bernie takes the rural Midwest and western states. Bernie will take the northeast states.
What can be determined about the large liberal states from that? Who, and by what margins, will take NY, NY, PA, CA, IL, for example?
And why does Hillary do so poorly in the middle of the country states? Could she even carry Colorado in the general?
itsrobert
(14,157 posts)And Hillary won that state.
morningfog
(18,115 posts)itsrobert
(14,157 posts)Where Hillary stomped Bernie 2 to 1.
morningfog
(18,115 posts)Why has she lost so badly and what came she learn from it?
itsrobert
(14,157 posts)Hillary won 70 percent of the latino vote in Texas. Where there is diversity, Clinton wins. And California is diverse. It's over. MATH!
morningfog
(18,115 posts)Ed Suspicious
(8,879 posts)Such fucking arrogance.
pinebox
(5,761 posts)itsrobert
(14,157 posts)Caucus state. California is an actual primary with other stuff on the ballot.
pinebox
(5,761 posts)Bluenorthwest
(45,319 posts)Includes 13 states: Alaska, Arizona, California, Colorado, Hawaii, Idaho, Montana, Nevada, New Mexico, Oregon, Utah, Washington, and Wyoming. In turn, this region is sub-divided into Mountain and Pacific areas.
Colorado very much the West, definitive Mountain West. Texas, not the West.
Where is it you live? I mean what part of the East?
itsrobert
(14,157 posts)I have also lived in El Paso, TX.
Regardless of the whole West region, there is a big difference between Colorado and California. California is far more diverse. And Hillary wins the more diverse states so far.
Colorado 70 percent Non-Hispanic whites
California 42.3 percent
Game over!
MillennialDem
(2,367 posts)leveymg
(36,418 posts)Colorado is purple and contestable. Hillary seems to do best in states that are Republican strongholds.
wildeyed
(11,243 posts)Culturally, it is much different. The demographics are different, too. And in a few years it will not longer be "deep red" or possibly red at all, due to the latino vote.
Samantha
(9,314 posts)Then Harry Reid came to town to save the day, made some strategic phone calls, and as one person said, put his hand on the scale to tip it in the other direction. The point is she did not win it by myself -- she had help.
Sam
senz
(11,945 posts)Samantha
(9,314 posts)She is just not credible. The flip-flopping, the deliberate lying, engaging two people to work with her campaign that are known for dirty tricks (Brock and Penn), and the dirty tricks themselves.
I was thinking just a a little while ago that these days are so reminiscent of the years Bill Clinton was in office. A distinct malaise settled over the Country that lasted until he and she left. Everyday there was a different soap opera, a scandal, or a nauseating rumor. These days are already starting to feel like those days. I don't think I can take another eight years of it again.
Sam
HubertHeaver
(2,522 posts)yourout
(7,534 posts)Did the biggest damage there.
morningfog
(18,115 posts)yourout
(7,534 posts)putitinD
(1,551 posts)Attorney in Texas
(3,373 posts)In the Republican Southern states where the Dixiecrats once prevailed, the minority Democrats are NOT Progressive.
Clinton does much better with non-Progressive Democrats.
NOTE: When I refer to "minority Democrats," I mean "minority Democrats versus majority Republicans" - I'm not referring to ethnic or racial minorities.
Hydra
(14,459 posts)And yes, the Blues here are very blue, the reds here are a bit odd ducks, and the libertarians are insufferable.
We don't really have a lot of well off Dems here who are happy with republican policies.
MADem
(135,425 posts)And didn't she win Nevada?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fort_Worth,_Texas
It seems to me that she connects in states that have large populations.
She doesn't do as well in rural states with lots of gun owners.
morningfog
(18,115 posts)You don't really think these margins turn on gun ownership.
She's a step in front of Warren, but a step behind Sanders on that issue.
Aha
(53 posts)Uh-huh.
MADem
(135,425 posts)It doesn't matter, really--that's one of those bullshit issues that the POTUS won't decide.
The states will carry that one over the line, just like they did marriage equality--they took that to the tipping point, and the Supremes saw the writing on the wall.
Bluenorthwest
(45,319 posts)President. My top two issues in life, marriage equality and cannabis legalization. You are lost on the reality and the details. It's also a very large mistake to lose Colorado and call cannabis legalization a bullshit issue, she lost because of that issue among others and here comes Oregon, also legal, Washington, also legal, Alaska also legal. Millions of voters worked hard and passed new laws which you say are bullshit issues in spite of the millions of persons and in spite of the growing new industry making new jobs we need. 'Jobs and medicine are bullshit issues' should be Hillary's motto in Oregon, see how that goes.
Plus of course, Hillary was strongly opposed to marriage equality until 2013, long after most Americans and she opposed it over a religious text that forbids her from holding office. Her tactics on marriage equality are nothing to be proud of, not a good thing to tout and to remind others about.
Rebkeh
(2,450 posts)Gun control is not going to fly here. Hell no, cold dead hands. I'm in a populated area of MO/KS and it's a little nuts, go to the rural areas and ... forget it. It just will not happen.
Gwhittey
(1,377 posts)Is or did just have a NRA lobbyist raise money for her, does that not count?
Rebkeh
(2,450 posts)loyalsister
(13,390 posts)nt
MADem
(135,425 posts)loyalsister
(13,390 posts)The "Gateway Arch" is on the MO side of STL.
I know you're thinking that there are considerable differences between T.S. Eliot and me. Yes, it is true that he was from St. Louis, which started calling itself the Gateway to the West after Eero Saarinen's Gateway Arch was erected, and I'm from Kansas City, where people think of St. Louis not as the Gateway to the West but as the Exit from the East.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gateway_Arch
Manifestor_of_Light
(21,046 posts)Austin - UT Austin and several other schools
San Marcos - Texas State University (dumb name), formerly Southwest Texas State Teachers' College, where Lyndon Johnson went to college and stole his first election, for Student Body President
Bryan/College Station - Texas A&M
MADem
(135,425 posts)Manifestor_of_Light
(21,046 posts)(((FROWN)))
I figure if I put a Bernie sign in my yard I'd probably get firebombed. In 2008 and 2012 I had a large Obama sign on foam core board I had painted in my yard. Several times guys drove by in pickups yelling at us.
I also have a fence because these people have no boundaries and love to come up and bother you for work (which they won't show up for), or cig money, or try to con you out of something.
MADem
(135,425 posts)People are crazy. They'll shoot your house or car.
Not worth it.
I've never been convinced to vote for someone as a consequence of a sign, anyway. At best I've gotten name recognition from them so I can do my own research (in local races). A lot of times the people with the most signs are the biggest assholes!
Bluenorthwest
(45,319 posts)includes 13 states: Alaska, Arizona, California, Colorado, Hawaii, Idaho, Montana, Nevada, New Mexico, Oregon, Utah, Washington, and Wyoming. In turn, this region is sub-divided into Mountain and Pacific areas.
Texas is not the West. No matter what Ft Worth calls itself. I know a guy calls himself Luke Skywalker. He isn't. Merced CA calls itself the 'Gateway to Yosemite' but Yosemite is 80 miles and two hours away, in another county and way up a mountain.....the two places are not at all the same....
Rebkeh
(2,450 posts)here near the MO/KS state line, people generally have a very strong independent streak. We have a lot of libertarians and libertarian leaning people, they don't trust the establishment. It doesn't surprise me the dems like Bernie better.
Another reason KS may have gone to Bernie is Brownback...he has been horrible for them over there. Just awful. Bernie is a breath of fresh air by comparison.
But, take it with a grain because I am not from here (originally from CA) and I haven't been here that long.
reformist2
(9,841 posts)Attorney in Texas
(3,373 posts)Hydra
(14,459 posts)Team Hill seems to be obsessed about separating us into voting block groups. It's really a values divide rather than a social orientation thing.
JonLeibowitz
(6,282 posts)Some do not care. Some do.
Hydra
(14,459 posts)I have one in my family- she thinks anything bad about Hillary is a RW smear. Gotta hand it to Team Hill- for the low info voters, when she promises things that will help them, they believe she is speaking to them directly and promising it.
I wish it were true.
JonLeibowitz
(6,282 posts)She doesn't understand how I can present substantive criticisms of Clinton without it being from the right. Binary thinking.
Then she proceeds to quote/link Peter Daou to me, seemingly unaware he is on Brock's Wall St payroll
Also she's indicating a major motivation for her choice is to elect the first woman president.
This election has shown me how low information many voters really are. It's sad, because once you really know what they represent, the contrast is stark.
Hydra
(14,459 posts)I see her watching CNN and local news, and it's all crap. She comes back scared and upset about it all, and can't think clearly. Even the PBS news hour is really lacking in the useful info dept, which she also watches. She thinks she's well educated on the subjects when she is done, but basically she's been spoonfed propaganda that leads her to support the wrong people.
It's really horrifying to watch. It was worse when I had to sit through Fox Noise for more than an hour while at a job site and feeling my brain getting rewired to their worldview. As someone wise once posted, "They call it "Programming" for a reason. What are you choosing to program yourself with?"
MADem
(135,425 posts)best way to ensure that, even if Clinton was kidnapped and never heard from again, that those kind of insults will either encourage people to write in Jimmy Carter or keep 'em at home?
Real smart politicking there! "Hey, Stupid--How come you don't vote for my candidate?" is never a good vote-getting strategy.
smh!
JonLeibowitz
(6,282 posts)I'm not an asshole.
Of course, I, as we all do, form my own opinions of whether the person knows the issues and where the candidates stand on them well enough to make a well-informed choice.
Hydra
(14,459 posts)That's kind of a weird thing to want in your supporters, isn't it? People who don't know what she'll actually do in the WH?
JonLeibowitz
(6,282 posts)She is winning based on vague concepts like experience, pragmatism, and having survived RW attacks. It's rather amazing how people have been "won over" by such a cynical pitch.
Of course it is also possible that the not so subtle message of vision of her candidacy is to be the first woman president, issues and values be damned.
MADem
(135,425 posts)JonLeibowitz
(6,282 posts)So yes, I understand it.
Bluenorthwest
(45,319 posts)That is exactly what I assume, that they are drawn to that uptight conservative view, that bigoted, atavistic hypocrisy. They are attracted to the history of saying 'we can't let them', they enjoy seeing public denigration of their neighbors and wish to reward her for doing that. Plus the Iraq War, they clearly like that too....
MADem
(135,425 posts)Not only are they stupid, they don't check her record!!
Unreal....
You guys complain when we bring up her record(RW Smears!), so yes, I have to think you aren't interested in people knowing it.
Hillary personally has made as little effort as possible to speak about her platform and what she intends to do, so I don't think you guys are doing anything that isn't officially sanctioned by the campaign.
I want to personally thank your campaign, however, for misleading my relative. She thinks she'll get more SSI under a Clinton Admin because of Hillary's comments during one of the debates. Does that not equate to promising "free stuff" that cannot be delivered on for a vote?
Gwhittey
(1,377 posts)Why do I care what people vote? And Why in hell should I care what people say on forum enough to cause me to change my vote? This kinda explain a lot, if you are not basing your vote on actions of candidate or their past voting records but on image of supporters then I guess that explains why people would vote for Hillary.
Gwhittey
(1,377 posts)Take the carp now 1/2 DU are saying, that all Sanders supporters want is free stuff. My god I am a Ex-Republican that voted for Bush first time, skipped the next election because I started to realize that GOP was racist and insane the swiftboat shit made me walk away and then Voted for Obama mainly because Clinton pissed me off with racist crap. Now I see this election and wonder How in the frack did I get passed by a large part of Dem party going to the right being that I use to be right center? All same shit that pissed me off in GOP and drove me away is happening now.
-Race baiting which coming from a supposed candidate that is running for (D)
-Using dirty misleading tactics to accuse a person like Sanders of being racist.(Swiftboat anyone?)
Hydra
(14,459 posts)And we're all kind of wondering how the hell it happened too. Our party leaders all tell us we're seeing things while they laugh their way to the bank.
We're working on what we want to do about that. I hope you'll add to that discussion.
redstateblues
(10,565 posts)He knows he can't keep.
Hydra
(14,459 posts)He's asking why we haven't done what he's proposing yet, when the rest of the civilized world(which we aren't part of) can.
If we can't do it, it's because we don't want to, or the people in charge don't represent us.
In contrast, Clinton is doing as little as she can to get elected, and protecting the people who are keeping us from moving toward sanity. Is that worth voting for?
Gwhittey
(1,377 posts)Democrat on a big time liberal forum about how universal healthcare would be good. And they are telling you it would not work. OMG I think I am in lala land. I never read/posted here after I made a account a few years ago because I was under impression this site was too liberal for me, just start posting just a while ago and I must say I think I am too liberal for this site now. Has DU always been this bad with people using "free stuff" like a GOPer would do?
Hydra
(14,459 posts)Team Hillary reps here are pushing the idea that nothing can be done if we win the WH, we should just let Hillary have her "turn" and be done with it.
reformist2
(9,841 posts)DURHAM D
(32,617 posts)morningfog
(18,115 posts)Gwhittey
(1,377 posts)I mean she is taking money from a NRA lobbyist who is co-hosting a fundraiser with her chief camp staffer.
Lizzie Poppet
(10,164 posts)Lorien
(31,935 posts)no candidate with even half as high an unfavorable rating as Hillary has has ever won a general election. The fact that she only does well in Red low information voter States is very telling.
redstateblues
(10,565 posts)On the middle class was Walter Mondale. He won ONE state. His home state MN. The Rs would make mincemeat out of Bernie and his schemes
morningfog
(18,115 posts)redstateblues
(10,565 posts)morningfog
(18,115 posts)You should want to know why she did so poorly.
Sanders has done poorly in only one region, the south. Everywhere else he had been competitive or won handily.
Bernie's southern losses have been discussed at length.
Why has Hillary lost so badly in multiple regions of the county? You should want to know.
Gwhittey
(1,377 posts)chewbacca defense as I did before but for some reason posting a quote from South Park got me my first hidden.
Bread and Circus
(9,454 posts)Chitown Kev
(2,197 posts)not the "Midwest"
The "Midwest" = The traditional Big 10 states
Michigan, Illinois, Minnesota, Indiana, Wisconsin, Ohio, Iowa...sometimes people throw in Missouri...
Hillary won Iowa (barely), Sanders won Minnesota big...
Hillary is on track to win Illinois and Michigan BIG (and Missouri?)...Ohio and Wisconsin looks to be tight (I actually expect Sanders to win Wisconsin)
OZi
(155 posts)Hillary does better where more people are limited to broadcast media and local newspapers.
Remember those exit polls from New Hampshire? "Honest and trustworthy" and "shares my values" are very big deals for people that have more information to decipher.
Chitown Kev
(2,197 posts)OZi
(155 posts)Doesn't sound funny to me.
Chitown Kev
(2,197 posts)
Who do you think is honest and trustworthy?
Only Clinton (7%) NO DATA
Only Sanders (37%) Sanders won these voters 90-9%
Both of them (48%) Clinton won these voters 75-25%
Neither of them (6%) NO DATA
http://www.cbsnews.com/elections/2016/primaries/democrat/massachusetts/exit/
OZi
(155 posts)New Hampshire: "Cares about people like me" - 26%
New Hampshire: "Can win in November" - 12%
http://graphics.wsj.com/elections/2016/new-hampshire-primaries-exit-polls/
Massachusetts: "Honest and Trustworthy" - 27%
Massachusetts: "Cares about people like me" - 23%
Massachusetts: ""Can win in November" - 20%
http://www.cbsnews.com/elections/2016/primaries/democrat/massachusetts/exit/
People were making their choices based on different values. Honesty was nearly 3 times as import as "Can win in November" in New Hampshire. In Massachusetts, "Can win in November" was nearly as important as honesty.
People will overlook a lot when winning or losing is at stake. Do Patriots fans care about "Deflategate?"
Number23
(24,544 posts)So far we've seen it implied that Hillary does bad with white voters because they are "more progressive" which of course means that the too many to count black, Hispanic, Asian and other minorities that are voting for her are doing so because they're NOT progressive.
Now, they're back slapping over how "informed" they are too. More progressive, and more informed! That doesn't look at all like the things you say to yourself to make yourself feel better about things not going the way you want. Not even a little bit.
Gwhittey
(1,377 posts)when they buy into GOP swiftboat tactics is really not a stretch.
Chitown Kev
(2,197 posts)when it comes to outreaching voters.
He can only fail or be failed...
Number23
(24,544 posts)she has so effectively painted Sanders as a racist. It couldn't possibly be any other reason.
You just keep telling yourself that. Whatever makes this easier for you.
Chitown Kev
(2,197 posts)Tell me, chile...
Number23
(24,544 posts)'Cause that's what I'm doing....
Lizzie Poppet
(10,164 posts)I wouldn't disrespect black voters by implying that they're stupid enough to fall for transparent horseshit like that.
I think a large part of Hillary's advantage with black voters is precisely because she is a far less progressive candidate. A lot of my fellow progressives make the mistake of assuming that because we share views on civil rights, black voters will thus embrace progressivism in general. That's a silly assumption.
Sure, some black voters are progressives, just like with every other racial demographic. But the millions of black Americans represent a huge range of political opinion...again, just like any other demographic. A not-insignificant number of these will be conservative-to-moderate in their politics...but unwilling to vote Republican, for obvious reasons. Who wants to support the candidates of a party that acts like it doesn't want you unless you're a high-profile black conservative?* So for these voters to look to Hillary Clinton, an obviously less-progressive candidate with a history of loyalty to civil rights reformers, makes perfect sense.
Do I think these voters would be well-served by prioritizing economic justice and re-considering Bernie as a candidate? Of course I do...that's my take on any non-1%'er. But I don't have any right to demand or expect that...only suggest it (and in a civil way).
* I want to mention just how tragically ironic is is that the party of Lincoln contains so many racists and that its political actions are often so harmful to black Americans. That is so messed up...it's pissing on that party's history.
Number23
(24,544 posts)in your perspective on anything race related. Or just about anything for that matter.
But still, thanks for "applauding" that black people have the right to vote a few days ago. Again, that was so incredibly kind of you.
consciouslocs
(43 posts)MineralMan
(146,345 posts)There's no region in the US where people don't have access. It's 2016, not 1996.
Only 78% of people in rural areas use internet.
Maybe I misspoke, maybe I should have used the word "use." In addition to my original comment, not everyone has cable. Some people ONLY have local TV and local newspapers for information. 100% of people are not getting information online and internet usage does vary by region.
"As internet use nears saturation for some groups, a look at patterns of adoption"
http://www.pewinternet.org/2015/06/26/americans-internet-access-2000-2015/
From 2013:
http://www.cybercollege.com/letter33.htm
A study from 2005 that finds a correlation between income and voting rates and internet access:
http://www.firstmonday.dk/ojs/index.php/fm/article/view/1216/1136
Maybe if all libraries and everyone has friends with internet, I guess you could argue everyone has access to internet. It isn't free where I live. Devices to use it aren't free. Just a few years ago, I lived in an area where the only options for high-speed internet were satellite or ISDN. Have you ever had to consider having to pay $20 a month for dial-up at any time in the past 6 years?
oberliner
(58,724 posts)For what that is worth.
book_worm
(15,951 posts)and the question will continue to be: Can Bernie win any state that isn't overwhelmingly white?
morningfog
(18,115 posts)She had every advantage. Why is she getting blown out in multiple regions?
You can explain Bernie's losses in the south as his failure with AA voters.
What is the explanation for Hilary's failure?
Chitown Kev
(2,197 posts)She is winning black and white voters in Michigan
http://www.freep.com/story/news/politics/2016/03/05/clinton-has-big-lead-sanders-michigan/81270490/
Gwhittey
(1,377 posts)The demo that Sanders excels in a lot of them do not typically have land lines. The stupid polling companies did not take into account the new trend called cell phones. And most list poling places are using are basically phone books. Wonder why we don't see more email polls.
I know my dad is getting called all time on land line and I have never got one on cell phone(I know anecdotal evidence.). Is that not what happened in 2 states here where polls had him losing one and barely winning another?
Chitown Kev
(2,197 posts)Gwhittey
(1,377 posts)It is almost like HRC camp had lied and made a narrative that Sanders was a racist or something. I am surprised she did not get Swift boat guys to come and do that just to really convince us she was as dirty as a GOP member.
BillZBubb
(10,650 posts)longship
(40,416 posts)As it stands now, if she's nominated, she could easily lose in November.
Granted, now isn't November, but I don't recall Bernie being under federal investigation. And as of now, Bernie demolishes all the GOP candidates.
There's one thing. This is one scary election season.
creeksneakers2
(7,476 posts)But if Bernie becomes the apparent nominee the commercials will start. All Summer and Fall the airwaves will be filled with films of people having heart attacks and being told they'll have to wait nine months for an appointment; bread lines in Venezuela; and people unable to pay their bills because their taxes are too high.
Perhaps Bernie could survive that. So far this year advertisements haven't been as effective as they used to be. But I'm pretty sure that all that would have to hurt Bernie at least a little bit, enough to bring him down to or even below Hillary's scores.
longship
(40,416 posts)Bernie has an awesome approval percent, though.
And Hillary's is horrible.
I don't know what we're going to have to do to get her elected in November if she gets the nomination. Plus, she's under federal investigation, not good in an election year, as these things go.
She'll have my vote, but I am a bit worried. The GOP despise her == few cross-over votes.
BainsBane
(53,112 posts)overwhelming white populations,particularly in caucus states where turnout is low. His campaign announced a couple of moths ago that their strategy was to target those states. Clinton trounces him in states with high populations of color.
Region doesn't matter nearly as much as the racial composition of the voter turnout in a given state. (I expect we will see different results in Michigan and IL, also Midwestern.) This shouldn't be a mystery to anyone at this point. Electoral data is conclusive on the point.
Sanders message strikes a cord with white people who have seen their standard of living flatten or decline in the last couple of decades. For people who were poor and disenfranchised, and deprived of equal rights in the halcyon days of the white middle class, that message quite understandably doesn't have the same resonance.
As much as the right and some "progressives" like to pretend race doesn't matter, that is not the nature of the society we live in or its history--and history is evoked during this election.
Clinton doesn't have the same appeal among the white bourgeoisie that Sanders does because her campaign doesn't place their frustration at its center. It's not that Sanders seeks to exclude non-whites. He explicitly tries to include them. But his ideological framework is based on class exploitation as he experiences and understands it. Clinton instead takes the more typical Democratic approach of appealing to the party's key constituencies and as a result she does better with them.
thereismore
(13,326 posts)DrDan
(20,411 posts)morningfog
(18,115 posts)DCBob
(24,689 posts)and leads in the polling in several mid-west states.
wyldwolf
(43,870 posts)He needs a geography lesson! I think this is the most accepted and logical division of the states..
Mopar151
(10,006 posts)Farmers, and rural folks in general, have a well placed distrust & disgust of banks. Throw in anyone who inteded to live on intrest from their savings in retirement, and those various financial hustlers who prey on, well, dammnear anyone...... And you have a lot of voters ready for Bernie.
Orsino
(37,428 posts)morningfog
(18,115 posts)Orsino
(37,428 posts)morningfog
(18,115 posts)She got exactly zero delegates in VT, did not even break 15%. That is a piss poor performance by any objective measure.
Orsino
(37,428 posts)Also, Vermont, in the extreme northeastern part of the midwest, was an early Sanders stronghold.
morningfog
(18,115 posts)pdsimdars
(6,007 posts)wildeyed
(11,243 posts)You first have to prove that she has done poorly in the mid-west and west. Only then can you ask why. Looking at the map, I don't see that. Most have not even voted
And this has nothing to do with the GE. This is about Democratic primary voters choosing a candidate for the GE. Are you implying that MA will go for Trump in the GE?