Support NeoGAF

[Deleted member 231381]

Will Hillary run as an independent?

I laughed.

 

[Gestahl]

Last time, she used the race card against Obama and it blew up on her face. It will be a test for her.

Will she ask Bernie to condemn Louis Farrakhan

I wonder what the Jewish equivalent of that would be

 

[noshten]

Yes. I agree with this. I very deeply worry about the Sanders ground game. I don't necessarily have reason to suppose it is bad, but the fact it is unproven doesn't fill one with confidence.

You shouldn't worry so much, the tools Sander's campaign has compared to Obama in 08 are very different - simply put we are living in a different time. A time where new technology is changing the political landscape and is unparalleled to past elections, from mobile applications for canvassing, organizing online, comprehensive online fundraising.
Sanders campaign is the first of it's kind in terms of fundraising hence I liked the article earlier on:

“I’ve never heard of a presidential campaign, even a minor party presidential campaign, that didn’t have a fundraising team,” said one campaign finance attorney. “But, OK if it’s working.”

And, judging by Sanders’s latest fundraising numbers, it is.

“In the past there was always the digital team and the finance team and they hated each other,” said Craig Engle, a campaign finance attorney. “But now you’ve got a situation—at least with Bernie Sanders—where now the digital team and the finance team is the same team.”

Symone Sanders, a spokesperson for the campaign, confirmed to The Daily Beast that the campaign doesn’t have anyone on staff focused full-time on raising money. Instead, she said, the campaign relies on its digital and data teams to bring home the small-dollar bacon.


Larry Sabato, who heads the University of Virginia’s Center for Politics, said Sanders’s decision to opt out of having a finance team is “remarkable.”

“Who isn’t impressed with Sanders’s fundraising?” he said. “He has more or less kept pace with Clinton, and in a key way—small gifts, which have a lot more punch in politics—Sanders has exceeded her by a mile.”

In those last three months, Sanders raised just 4 million dollars less than Hillary Clinton, despite having zero staff dedicated to fundraising. And according to the site p2016, which tracks campaign staff hires, Clinton has upwards of 30 finance team staffers.

Right now the majority of his resources have been focused in a few early states, but lets say he wins Iowa and NH - firstly that would effect his polling numbers nationally, secondary it would effect his fundraising reach, I expect him to refill his coffers if he wins both these early contests and the money to be reinvested in organizations similar to what he has in place in Iowa/NH.
It's just a matter of momentum and showing people on the fence he is a realistic option and there is nothing inevitable in this election.

There is another factor that has to do with the republicans, if Trump is capable of decimating the field as he is doing right now - it's pretty possible that he might become the inevitable nominee. This might help Sanders by people choosing to take part of Democratic Primary because it might be perceived as a closer contest and some people might choose to be spoilers while others might generally prefer voting for the possibility of Sanders rather than Clinton or Trump.

 

[kami_sama]

comparing '08 Obama to '16 Bernie is disingenuous since Obama was always loyal to the party and and was handpicked to deliver a keynote address in `04. Obama had the blessing from the establishment.

Bernie made a career being critical of the Democratic Party all his life. Now he is using the party's primiariis as a vehicle to propel him

Establishment folks have not chosen him and know that he is not a Democrat.

This is why 2016 is very different from 2008.

Obama was the golden child and rising star +loyal to the party. Bernie isn't

Still, I hope he wins. The DNC attacks have only give him more exposure.

 

[Inuhanyou]

I wonder why women voters started moving away from Hillary and towards Sanders?

Because they are learning more about him. The same happens to everyone who is not invested emotionally in Hillary winning like its some game, or are so afraid of Trump that they'd back big money establishment over the one with better policy proposals.

The fact of the matter is, Hillary's viewpoints don't make sense, and are about as career politician as they come.

So when people see her saying "oh we can't afford universal healthcare, or free college tuition" even when people see that she's advocated these positions before against Obama, they know not to trust her to deliver on whatever promise she's rallied people around at the time.

 

[z0m3le]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EMrKC2zTbq0 leading by 14% in new hampshire now too

 

[Erevador]

People just get sick of how contrived Hillary's campaigns are. The same thing happened in 2008. She went from inevitable to unbearable in the eyes of voters.

Sanders is speaking truth and that is resonating with people. Everything he says is clearly straight from the heart. He really BELIEVES in what he says. That honesty and passion is resonating with people.

I'm not sure I agree with all of Bernie's economic ideas, but I think he's the president the people need to avoid a French revolution. He's the man for the moment.

 

[ivysaur12]

Both Nates dislike PPP. PPP tends to do well in elections where the average pollster does well, because they basically just fix their result to produce roughly what they expect other pollsters to show. Rather than have a consistent methodology, they adjust their methodology every other poll minutely, which makes them terrible as a piece of data. I think that's why they've been caught with their pants down here; because there's a short shift that you wouldn't catch if you thought "hmm, Sanders seems a bit high, let's make different assumptions about turnout to the last poll".

FWIW, there's really no proof of this besides Nate's own conjecture. Maybe they are, but there's been no evidence to the fact and the spat between Nate Silver and PPP rang as particularly bizarre.

 

[Protein]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EMrKC2zTbq0 leading by 14% in new hampshire now too

Holy shit.

 

[noshten]

Because they are learning more about him. The same happens to everyone who is not invested emotionally in Hillary winning like its some game, or are so afraid of Trump that they'd back big money establishment over the one with better policy proposals.

The fact of the matter is, Hillary's viewpoints don't make sense, and are about as career politician as they come.

So when people see her saying "oh we can't afford universal healthcare, or free college tuition" even when people see that she's advocated these positions before against Obama, they know not to trust her to deliver on whatever promise she's rallied people around at the time.

The dream lives

 

[Deleted member 231381]

FWIW, there's really no proof of this besides Nate's own conjecture. Maybe they are, but there's been no evidence to the fact and the spat between Nate Silver and PPP rang as particularly bizarre.

Again, not one Nate - both Nates.

 

[Irobot82]

Sounds like the news media wants more ads revenues.

 

[zelas]

"Unelectable tho"

Seriously, that narrative is probably the worst thing i've heard for people voting against their self interests.

He's in the same range Obama was in the 2008 elections when Hillary lead nationally then as well.

You can be capable of winning primaries or party nominations and still be unelectable nationally. You might want to find more effective evidence to dispute the narrative you speak of.

 

[Days like these...]

I think Hillary's camp latest tactic of "Bernie's a nice guy but he can't win!" is going to backfire. People don't like being talked down, patronized or being treated with condescension. Similar to here on GAF people are just going to double down on Bernie. Sorry abuela

 

[noshten]

You can be capable of winning primaries or party nominations and still be unelectable nationally. You might want to find more effective evidence to dispute the narrative you speak of.

Do you hear what you are saying how is Sanders unelectable against the likes of Trump and Cruz. Are you saying that suddenly all minorities would flock to either man instead of Sanders or remain at home on election day?

 

[Mrbob]

Would be nice to see Sanders get there nomination but I'm doubtful.

At least I would have someone to vote for in the general election. Hillary/Trump general election is unappealing.

 

[Days like these...]

You can be capable of winning primaries or party nominations and still be unelectable nationally. You might want to find more effective evidence to dispute the narrative you speak of.

Like the polls showing Bernie does better than Republican candidates in the GE? Would that be 'more effective evidence' or nah?

 

[phanphare]

You can be capable of winning primaries or party nominations and still be unelectable nationally. You might want to find more effective evidence to dispute the narrative you speak of.

you mean like polls showing Bernie doing better against the Republican candidates than Hillary?

edit: beaten ;p

 

[JustenP88]

I think Hillary's camp latest tactic of "Bernie's a nice guy but he can't win!" is going to backfire. People don't like being talked down, patronized or being treated with condescension. Similar to here on GAF people are just going to double down on Bernie. Sorry abuela

It's ridiculous. One candidate has Independent appeal. The one saying "he's unelectable" has practically zero.

 

[Jacksinthe]

Gooooooood. Sanders can do it.

 

[Snowman Prophet of Doom]

I like this thread, because the posts in it almost seem to be coming from different universes. A bunch of posts are thrilled because they love Bernie. Another bunch are complaining because GAF apparently hates Bernie. Then you have another set pointing out that GAF loves Bernie. It's fun.

Bernie inspires passionate support amongst those who follow him, but GAF also has a lot of 30-something and minority Democrats who fear that Bernie is a riskier prospect because it involves assuming that the great mass of undecided voters will turn around on their general negativity toward the "socialist" label despite there being no polling data to suggest that will be the case. It's not so much they hate Bernie, as they hate Bernie supporters who extol his virtues and denigrate Clinton without acknowledging that, ultimately, a Bernie presidency probably will not look all that different from a Clinton presidency because of contemporary Congressional gridlock. I don't much care for Clinton and intend to vote for Bernie because I can't justify the realpolitik bullshit to myself as I get older, but I will admit that he has probably the most annoying supporters on the planet.

 

[Epsilon-delta]

President Trump/Cruz inc.

Get me the fuck out of this country man

Such hyperbole.

Like minorities and women are just going to sit at home and have the country elect Trump.

 

[-MB-]

If he wins the primaries hes gonna get crushed by Trump in debates, I can see it happening now.

 

[Madness]

"Unelectable tho"

Seriously, that narrative is probably the worst thing i've heard for people voting against their self interests.

He's in the same range Obama was in the 2008 elections when Hillary lead nationally then as well.

The he's just like Obama narrative is also dumb. Unlike Obama, Bernie is not going to use his charisma, promise for change to sway millions of Republicans and right leaning independents. Obama ran on a platform of change, after a brutal 8 years and an economic crisis that was just taking shape.

Obviously for Democrats, they have the numbers to win, but someone like Bernie, it's much harder for him to capture swing states than it will be Hillary.

 

[injurai]

If he wins the primaries hes gonna get crushed by Trump in debates, I can see it happening now.

How? Trump is a blow hard. He will throw a fit, and Sander's won't play his game. Trump's tactics don't work outside his already established constituency.

 

[ivysaur12]

Again, not one Nate - both Nates.

Now, take that sentence and add "Nates" instead of "Nate" and the result still holds.

I mean, maybe they're wrong and Bernie really is surging. Or maybe your own biases don't want to see that and thus are attacking the pollster instead of the poll. We'll see in a few week, but it's silly to attack PPP for some sort of conspiracy with their polling that has zero evidence to the fact that came off as brazenly ridiculous on the parts of both Nate Silver and Nate Cohn.

Crab, why not make a thread showing that another polling organization still has Hillary up in Iowa if we're back to making threads for every poll?

 

[Stumpokapow]

Will she ask Bernie to condemn Louis Farrakhan

I wonder what the Jewish equivalent of that would be

If she really wanted to put him in an awkward spot, she could ask him to publicly support Netanyahu.

 

[benjipwns]

How? Trump is a blow hard. He will throw a fit, and Sander's won't play his game. Trump's tactics don't work outside his already established constituency.

-July 2015

 

[Team Alucard]

Bernie inspires passionate support amongst those who follow him, but GAF also has a lot of 30-something and minority Democrats who fear that Bernie is a riskier prospect because it involves assuming that the great mass of undecided voters will turn around on their general negativity toward the "socialist" label despite there being no polling data to suggest that will be the case. It's not so much they hate Bernie, as they hate Bernie supporters who extol his virtues and denigrate Clinton without acknowledging that, ultimately, a Bernie presidency probably will not look all that different from a Clinton presidency because of contemporary Congressional gridlock. I don't much care for Clinton and intend to vote for Bernie because I can't justify the realpolitik bullshit to myself as I get older, but I will admit that he has probably the most annoying supporters on the planet.

Is the great mass of undecided voters going to suddenly change their feelings about Hillary Clinton?

I can understand people seeing Bernie as a risk, but stop trying to pretend Hillary is a guarantee. She's not.

fwiw, I think Hillary would be a better president then Bernie. I have a feeling a President Sanders would be as ineffective as President Carter. But I don't buy the chosen one invincibility bullshit her supporters keep peddling. I honestly believe Bernie would have a better chance in the general, even with the socialism boogieman. People here underestimate just how much the general public dislikes Hillary.

 

[Inuhanyou]

The dream lives

If only.

 

[King Tubby]

The he's just like Obama narrative is also dumb. Unlike Obama, Bernie is not going to use his charisma, promise for change to sway millions of Republicans and right leaning independents. Obama ran on a platform of change, after a brutal 8 years and an economic crisis that was just taking shape.

If there's anything I took from what little I've seen of the Democratic debates, Sanders needs to take a few lessons from Hillary in terms of political/public speaking.

 

[Dreams-Visions]

I certainly wish him the best.

I wonder who his running mate would be. I feel like he needs to have a really strong #2 to boost confidence in the ticket among the independents.

 

[benjipwns]

Carter was a pretty good President once he stopped trying to be his own chief of staff and before Teddy started undermining him to bump up his own Presidential bid.

Plus that whole Iran hostage thing.

 

[Einhander]

Yes, yes! One step closer to the incredible debate between Trump and Sanders. A fight for the ages.

 

[injurai]

-July 2015

Just come out and say what you need to say.

 

[pigeon]

Now, take that sentence and add "Nates" instead of "Nate" and the result still holds.

I mean, maybe they're wrong and Bernie really is surging. Or maybe your own biases don't want to see that and thus are attacking the pollster instead of the poll. We'll see in a few week, but it's silly to attack PPP for some sort of conspiracy with their polling that has zero evidence to the fact that came off as brazenly ridiculous on the parts of both Nate Silver and Nate Cohn.

Crab, why not make a thread showing that another polling organization still has Hillary up in Iowa if we're back to making threads for every poll?

I dunno, this isn't really a thread for one poll. It's a thread for a movement in the aggregate, and admittedly an interesting one. Two polls show Bernie up by a bit, one poll shows Hillary up by a bit is still a change from the previous position.

I didn't say anything about the last poll in PoliGAF because I felt like we'd belabored the point that the aggregate, not individual polls, is what matters. But if there are multiple polls showing the same data, that's a trendline move and it's pretty relevant.

Guess we have to see what the next one says!

 

[Days like these...]

I certainly wish him the best.

I wonder who his running mate would be. I feel like he needs to have a really strong #2 to boost confidence in the ticket among the independents.

Elizabeth Warren and he has it in the bag!

 

[Marion Cobretti]

Bernie, in terms of domestic policy, could be a modern day Teddy Roosevelt.

We so need this guy to be the what follows up Obama.

 

[XGRaViSmOrSX]

Good. I hope he keeps gaining ground on her. I absolutely can't stand hillary clinton. Can't quite put my finger on it, but every time I see an image of her I instantly smell shit and burning hair. She just feels so disingenuous with everything she does. yuck.

 

[Black Republican]

Team Clinton fucking up the count?


Someone's getting clapped

 

[SenorArdilla]

Is it really comparable though?

 

[Farsi]

Yes, yes! One step closer to the incredible debate between Trump and Sanders. A fight for the ages.

Would be awesome. Bernie's got a swagger to him, I don't think he'd get bullied around either.

 

[ivysaur12]

Is the great mass of undecided voters going to suddenly change their feelings about Hillary Clinton?

I can understand people seeing Bernie as a risk, but stop trying to pretend Hillary is a guarantee. She's not.

fwiw, I think Hillary would be a better president then Bernie. I have a feeling a President Sanders would be as ineffective as President Carter. But I don't buy the chosen one invincibility bullshit her supporters keep peddling. I honestly believe Bernie would have a better chance in the general, even with the socialism boogieman. People here underestimate just how much the general public dislikes Hillary.

Hillary is basically the de-facto nominee to the general public, so her numbers have acted as if she is as such. Most of her fall has come from independents who have fallen out of love since her time as Secretary of State (which was going to happen anyways), and Democrats in a contentious primary. If she is the nominee, those Democratic numbers would go back up, so it's a bit of a wash.

I think the fear for many people is that the attacks on Bernie have not started in earnest because he's never been seen as an actual threat to the GOP as a candidate. He's not battle tested, he performed mediocrely at the debates, and I think there's a legitimate worry that he would not be able to accurately portray his policies in a way that's palatable to the general public and will be painted as a crazy socialist by the right. I fear that will work. I earnestly don't believe we're in a place as a country to elect someone like Bernie Sanders, at least not yet.

My primary is last and I haven't made up my mind who I'm voting for. By the time we come around, it should be fairly decided, and I'll vote for the candidate who polls better in the general since it's sort of a tossup between Bernie and Hillary for me at this point. But I have legitimate concerns about his electability that I fear won't be expressed in polling until after he wins the nomination.

I dunno, this isn't really a thread for one poll. It's a thread for a movement in the aggregate, and admittedly an interesting one. Two polls show Bernie up by a bit, one poll shows Hillary up by a bit is still a change from the previous position.

I didn't say anything about the last poll in PoliGAF because I felt like we'd belabored the point that the aggregate, not individual polls, is what matters. But if there are multiple polls showing the same data, that's a trendline move and it's pretty relevant.

Guess we have to see what the next one says!

Yet it also omits another poll showing Hillary in the lead in Iowa, where the aggregate still shows her with an albeit narrow margin ahead of Sanders. I think the trend is interesting, but it also ignores that, in the aggregate, Hillary Clinton is still winning. I would be okay with it if all of that was in the OP. It's not.

 

[pigeon]

Is the great mass of undecided voters going to suddenly change their feelings about Hillary Clinton?

I mean, yes? That's what undecided voters do, they decide. Saying you're "not sure" until the day of the elections and then going ahead and plumping for the establishment choice is a super common voter behavior. You can see people on GAF doing it! And that's especially common if, as you suggest, you're not all that personally enthusiastic about Hillary but do think she's more electable.

 

[perfectchaos007]

The ABC brigade is doing their job

Anyone
But
Clinton

 

[Snowman Prophet of Doom]

Is the great mass of undecided voters going to suddenly change their feelings about Hillary Clinton?

I can understand people seeing Bernie as a risk, but stop trying to pretend Hillary is a guarantee. She's not.

fwiw, I think Hillary would be a better president then Bernie. I have a feeling a President Sanders would be as ineffective as President Carter. But I don't buy the chosen one invincibility bullshit her supporters keep peddling. I honestly believe Bernie would have a better chance in the general, even with the socialism boogieman. People here underestimate just how much the general public dislikes Hillary.

It honestly depends on who the Republicans nominate. If they nominate Rubio, she will have a decently hard fight ahead of her because he's good-looking, young, appealing, has "street cred", etc., and is great at generating sound bites. If they nominate Trump, she IS inevitable, because the amount of support Trump will get outside of the GOP base will diminish significantly, though he likely will get a lot of right-leaning independents who just can't bring themselves to vote for a Dem and/or a Clinton and make the race closer than it otherwise should be. If it's Cruz, I have no clue.

Hillary DOES have high unfavorable ratings, but given she's inherited Obama's great campaign infrastructure, I don't see her doing significantly worse than him, proportionally.

 

[Deleted member 231381]

I dunno, this isn't really a thread for one poll. It's a thread for a movement in the aggregate, and admittedly an interesting one. Two polls show Bernie up by a bit, one poll shows Hillary up by a bit is still a change from the previous position.

I didn't say anything about the last poll in PoliGAF because I felt like we'd belabored the point that the aggregate, not individual polls, is what matters. But if there are multiple polls showing the same data, that's a trendline move and it's pretty relevant.

Guess we have to see what the next one says!

Indeed. That's why I have ARG included in the first post. Selzer on Thursday will be very interesting given their accuracy in the past.

 

[Einhander]

I'll do my part and vote for Sanders in the primary in Illinois.

 

[phanphare]

The he's just like Obama narrative is also dumb. Unlike Obama, Bernie is not going to use his charisma, promise for change to sway millions of Republicans and right leaning independents. Obama ran on a platform of change, after a brutal 8 years and an economic crisis that was just taking shape.

Obviously for Democrats, they have the numbers to win, but someone like Bernie, it's much harder for him to capture swing states than it will be Hillary.

Hillary is going to appeal to independents more so than Bernie? what?

 

[shamanick]

Lol wut

I'm not sure if there is a politician on this planet more tested than Hillary. She's beyond battle hardened.

But she did though

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dqGl-pDnYMQ

Was it genuine? It didn't seem to me at the time.