The Democratic Nomination

[rah]

Hell I would have voted for him so calling me a Sander hater is just plain wrong. . But I couldn't vote Hillary. AND hell no Trump.
But living in Illinois, it didn't matter.

And I've seen numbers and considering how few votes she lost by, it wouldn't have taken many. Not significant in my book, but I won't argue it.

 

[Sommerswerd]

The only POTUS candidate who has ever received more votes than Hillary did is Obama, so while turnout was the problem, it really wasn't. That is to say it was a structural problem rather than a motivation problem. Regardless, the grim likelihood is that whoever the Democratic nominee is will have to draw similar-to-Obama turnout to win, because that's how the election is structured via the electoral college system.

So a whole lot of folks are going to have to be convinced to vote for someone who was not their first choice, no matter who ends up getting nominated.

 

[rah]

It only needs to happen in less than a dozen states. So a record turnout countrywide is not necessary or relevant in this case.
The focus needs to be on those states. I could care less how many people in California, Illinois, or New York turn out. It doesn't matter.

 

[Farm Boy]

The only POTUS candidate who has ever received more votes than Hillary did is Obama

Demographic increase does most of the legwork there.

I mean, everyone talks about growth slowing, and it has. But that is growth slowing.

That the minor balancing input of the Electoral College has actually mattered twice in 20 is nothing short of boggling. The party balance on the interests is stacked way too vertical. Probably could use some spread horizontally. But that probably requires shortening some of the tallest perches. No mean feat, there. Everyone loves their own.

 

[Narz]

Not hard enough in my book if he couldn't convince his backers to show up on election day and vote for her.

I mean convincing people to support Clinton was a tough task

 

[Fippy]

Convincing peoples it's a fair & balanced voting system also prooves difficult, usually

 

[Narz]

Everyone loves their own.

What does it mean??!?!?

 

[Farm Boy]

The economic gorillas of a community are usually popular within that community even if we all, collectively, really need them to have a haircut.

 

[innonimatu]

The only POTUS candidate who has ever received more votes than Hillary did is Obama, so while turnout was the problem,

That's not very relevant, considering that the population of the US has been growing relatively fast.

 

[rah]

Yeah, I don't know why people keep thinking that it was something special.

 

[hobbsyoyo]

Corey Booker dropped out.

 

[Ajidica]

Corey Booker dropped out.

Can't say I'm surprised. He was always everybody's second favorite. Despite doing everything right, at the end of the day a presidential campaign is a roll of the dice and all the attempts to load the dice can't help if they come up snake eyes.
Still, he survived the campaign with his reputation intact, it's not like he became damaged goods. Plus, he is still young enough to run in 2024.

 

[hobbsyoyo]

I don't know if this got posted before but Marriane Williamson also dropped out this past week.

 

[Lexicus]

So um nobody here seems to be talking about it but WTH is with Warren claiming Bernie said a woman couldn't win the election? Why is this suddenly coming out now? What is the deal with Warren not shaking hands after the debate?

 

[Estebonrober]

So um nobody here seems to be talking about it but WTH is with Warren claiming Bernie said a woman couldn't win the election? Why is this suddenly coming out now? What is the deal with Warren not shaking hands after the debate?

Yea she lost my shaky support officially this week. It seems to me like she has fallen into the Obama/Clinton campaign strategist trap and is officially going to try to run center left. I'd still vote for her over anyone but Sanders but with the M4A hedge and now this (when she should be attacking Biden and Buttigieg like a pitbull instead) I'm out and told her campaign as much.

 

[Lexicus]

Since those questions probably come across as hostile to Warren, I am not particularly angry at Warren over any of this. This is politics. My question is why is she doing this. Warren could have, sort of like Bernie in 2016, said "enough with the damn emails, Bernie Sanders is not a sexist" and would have gotten so much cred for this but instead she's leaned into it...this doesn't seem like a winning move for her campaign, and seems guaranteed to create a lot of spite and division between the Bernie and Warren camps regardless of how it all turns out. It is almost as if Russian trolls are trying to divide the Democrats and Warren, rather than squashing the beef, just pours out a bunch of gasoline and lights a match!

 

[Estebonrober]

Since those questions probably come across as hostile to Warren, I am not particularly angry at Warren over any of this. This is politics. My question is why is she doing this. Warren could have, sort of like Bernie in 2016, said "enough with the damn emails, Bernie Sanders is not a sexist" and would have gotten so much cred for this but instead she's leaned into it...this doesn't seem like a winning move for her campaign, and seems guaranteed to create a lot of spite and division between the Bernie and Warren camps regardless of how it all turns out. It is almost as if Russian trolls are trying to divide the Democrats and Warren, rather than squashing the beef, just pours out a bunch of gasoline and lights a match!

Yea that's kind of what I saw too, just instead of Russians sub corporate democrats from my PoV.

 

[hobbsyoyo]

It certainly could be a harbinger of a more general feud breaking out. Right now though I'm mostly chalking it up to baiting questions from CNN coupled with non-stop coverage of every alleged slight between them. I fully agree Warren came out the loser in this (when she stopped to count 30 years I cringed hard) but if she moves to tamper things then this scandal could be swallowed up by the Next Stupid Thing Trump Does(tm).

I admit I did not pay to much attention to what questions the moderators were asking - I really only listened to the candidates and even then I wasn't following closely - but the Reddit consensus seems to be that CNN was back to presenting the GOP line as the default position on every issue and generally baiting the candidates to quarrel. And they certainly played up the Warren/Sanders feud to an extreme leading up to the debate.

 

[Ironsided]

Her campaign prepared and fed the damn the questions to CNN. Warren was in on it – that’s blatantly obvious when you see her fake smirk and her posturing and refusal to shake hands with Bernie. Total betrayal. 100% snake. 100% Hillary strategy. I have tried my best to like EW during this campaign because on many important issues she was very good. No more.

This is the stuff you can not do if you want to be representing the people. You don’t sell your “friends” down the river. You are held to a higher standard than centrists. The most important feature is to stay real and have some damn integrity. To stand up to this kind of games. Like Bernie does. That’s why he has the most donors and the most public support and rising. Even if it’s slow coming.

Painting Bernie as a sexist is so damn low. Did she even raise an eyebrow when Biden took credit for her work in the senate in the other debate? Did she fudge. Warrens has made her bed with the corporate democrats and you can see the puppet strings more clearly every day. What a tool and a loser.

It’s Bernie/Nina 2020 all the way now come hell or high water.

 

[Hygro]

Nina?