Discussion for article #245477
Hillary is the best one! If Bernieās message was actually going to get done, why has it not happened after his 25 years in the Senate? She is is the one with the skill and knowledge to get the job done. Compromise will be required and SHE can do it!
3 Likes
Hillaryās only plausible strategy in NH is to spend the next week lowering expectations to the point where if she gets ANY votes all, itās an unexpected over-perform. Not sure how she can accomplish that, since the polls are consistent and well-known, but she can jawbone it some, pay tribute to Bernie as a virtual favorite son, and hope she gets a little sympathy flowing her way while at the same time discouraging Bernie supporters from wasting their time voting when the outcome is assured.
NH Primary is virtually on Bernie Sandersā home turf ā very favorable demographics for him and right next door to Vermont. Itās his to lose.
2 Likes
First Poll From New Hampshire Since Iowa Shows Little Change
For once, a non-clickbait headline! Hurrah!
2 Likes
NH Primary is virtually on Bernie Sandersā home turf ā very favorable demographics for him and right next door to Vermont. Itās his to lose.
Indeed. And in terms of media narrative, it could easily go the opposite way from Iowa, in the sense that even if Bernie wins, Hillary could walk off with the winning narrative if she can keep it close. And in this case, she doesnāt even need to achieve a near-tie, she could conceivably lose by 5 or 6 points and still sell it as a ābig win.ā
But if he beats her by double digits, the best spin her campaign can put on it is that NH doesnāt really matter, because itās Bernieās home turf, and because itās demographically unlike most of the upcoming battleground states. Which is a perfectly good argument, but obviously not as good as that argument, combined with a much-closer-than-anticipated outcome.
1 Like
I would assume that Sanders wins NH, maybe not by 30 points but somewhere between 8-20 points is probable. She should just use this week, and the 2 debates, to challenge him on his ārevolutionā agenda and set up some frames and critiques for the states that follow.
4 Likes
Some positives for Rubio in there. His support from 8% to 12% in two days, and the gain entirely at the expense of the lower-tier establishment candidates. Mostly from Kaisch, in fact, which again is probably good for Rubio since Kaisch is probably the least defective of the non-Rubio, non-Trump/Cruz options and NH was Kaischās best hope at breaking out from the packā¦
The move puts Rubio in clear third place in NH vs it being Trump - Cruz and then a mob of others all around 6-9%.
Bernie is selling pie in the sky politics, and his followers appear not to be well versed in what a president can do by himself. Also, SCOTUS is getting ready to place limits on presidential powers.
I see what you did there.
Bernie is going to win in NH. Big, maybe 20% margin. But that doesnāt mean much this year. NH is useful for two thingsāfirst, getting a marginal candidate into the top tier; second, creating momentum in a crowded field. Neither applies here.
In a 2-person race, NH counts only for the few delegates it awards. Bernieās win will not translate to any future advantages, and he needs them against Hillaryās long-standing political machinery in the remaining 48 states.
1 Like
So your prediction is that even a big win by Bernie in NH will have no effect on the media narrative? Or that it will, but this wonāt lead to any voters taking a āsecond lookā at the candidates? If so, you could be right, but I donāt think thatās a foregone conclusion.
If, instead, you acknowledge that a big win in NH may have at least some effect on the media narrative, and on āsecond looks,ā but you just think that despite those factors Bernie wonāt make any real headway in NV, SC or beyond ā in other words, some voters may take a āsecond lookā but most (or at least enough) then stick with their original choice ā again, that also could very well be trueā¦but I donāt share your certainty on that point either.
Either way, weāll see soon enough.
Or not, because if Hillary wins (or even comes fairly close) in New Hampshire, Bernieās narrow path toward the actual nomination closes to a tiny crevice. And unless he somehow manages to wedge it back open with big, surprising wins in future states (which seems incredibly unlikely if he canāt pull it off in NH), then thatās pretty much the end of his candidacy in terms of an actual quest for the White House. Not necessarily over as a message campaign, but much less potent even in that role.
If, on the other hand, Bernie manages to win a respectable number of primaries and caucuses and keep the excitement up a lot longer, then even if Hillary still prevails in the end, the message campaign aspect gains more momentum, and could have a more profound and lasting effect on the party. But as far as Bernie being āin it to win it,ā if Hillary wins (or nearly wins) in NH, then I think the fat lady sings, bringing that act to an abrupt close.
Do not forget that the media are chomping at the bit to say, regardless of how much Sanders should win NH by, that āClintonās in troubleā, āClintonās staggered!ā, etc. It would be a miracle if the media does not spin the NH results in any way but bad news for Clinton other than an outright win of course.
And the demographics strongly favor Clinton after NH.
-
Media volumeāmentioning a name, no matter what the content, good or bad (which Trump has been riding for 6 months) will not change after NH, no matter what the outcome. The media only have the two of them to talk about, and will talk about them the same as they have before now.
-
Media approval and endorsementādoesnāt count for squat. Nobody votes a certain way because the media tells them to. (Well, maybe on the GOP side, but not for Democrats.)
Thanks. Sounds like your answer to the question is āyes, no real effect.ā
I donāt necessarily disagree with either of your points, overall, though I could quibble with the absolutism of the latter one, and I donāt think āwill talk about them the same as they have beforeā is necessarily true either. A big win would still be a big win, and despite the inevitable discounting (neighbor state advantage, demographic advantage) I expect it will still give him a bit of a bump in terms of being considered a more serious contender (which comes with more scrutiny as well, so that could go either way, to be sure).
Compromise is why we still have 19 million uninsured in this country instead of single payer universal coverage. It is why we still subsidize big oil and have expanded drilling almost as if Palin -drill, baby, drill - had won. Obama has spent his first seven years as President courting Republicans, even when he had a Democratic majority in both the House and the Senate during his first two years.
Bernie will use the bully pulpit to the extent that in 2018 the House and the Senate will become Democrat dominated. And then he can really get things done.
BTW, I am tired of all the news organizations, including TPM, only using pictures of Bernie looking like he is ranting. Yes he rants. It is appropriate. But he spends a lot more time looking like a normal person.
1 Like
Bernie is selling pie in the sky politics, and his followers appear not to be well versed in what a president can do by himself. Also, SCOTUS is getting ready to place limits on presidential powers.
Bernie is selling a vision. Neither he, nor anyone else, expects that he will be able to implement his policies in his first year, or maybe his first term. It is clear that to make any progress he will need Democratic control of at least one house and a mobilized public behind him. There is a difference between pie in the sky and aspirations. Two points ā one, if Bernie can ignite public passion behind his vision, and he seems to be doing that, the likelihood of actually accomplishing his goals, either sooner or later, will increase. HRC, for all her qualifications, does not seem to be igniting any passions beyond the idea of a competent, experienced woman who can inch things along, she will face the same Republican intransigence and not have the groundswell behind her. Hence, it is possible that she will accomplish less
Second, and this goes with the first, when you want to change something and you ask for an inch, as HRC does, especially in regards to our health care policies, you are lucky to get a millimeter. If you ask for a mile, like Bernie, you just might get that inch. Which is better, the inch or the millimeter?
Neither