Hillary vs Bernie

[OttoVonBismarck]

Nate Silver says Bernie has like a 4% chance to win in South Carolina and he still heavily favors HRC to win the nomination.

It'll be crushing to Bernie's momentum when he loses like 6 of the 7 primaries after NH, not to mention it'll also generate a significant delegate lead for Clinton. Also not to mention, the 15% of delegates who are superdelegates, almost all of whom are pledged to Hillary, won't jump off her ship in a close delegate race. They'll only jump to Bernie if he clearly has the weight of voters behind them (like they did for Obama in 2008 when it was obvious he was going to rack up more pledged delegates than HRC.)

Silver's key point is Bernie has yet to show any real effort to attract minority votes. Class based populism, for whatever reason, doesn't resonate with darkie.

[DGuller]

The danger for Hillary is that she may lose the aura of invincibility.  For most of the Democratic race the feeling was that primaries were a formality, and those were were aware of Sanders assumed he was just a debate sparring partner to keep Hillary in shape.  If the aura goes, then people will start paying a lot of attention to Sanders in a way they haven't previously.

[alfred russel]

Nate Silver says Bernie has like a 4% chance to win in South Carolina and he still heavily favors HRC to win the nomination.

It'll be crushing to Bernie's momentum when he loses like 6 of the 7 primaries after NH, not to mention it'll also generate a significant delegate lead for Clinton. Also not to mention, the 15% of delegates who are superdelegates, almost all of whom are pledged to Hillary, won't jump off her ship in a close delegate race. They'll only jump to Bernie if he clearly has the weight of voters behind them (like they did for Obama in 2008 when it was obvious he was going to rack up more pledged delegates than HRC.)

Silver's key point is Bernie has yet to show any real effort to attract minority votes. Class based populism, for whatever reason, doesn't resonate with darkie.

Until Iowa, Clinton had a big lead among minority voters in 2008. Most people haven't started to pay attention yet. There is still a good chance that Sanders is going to do quite well with minority voters - he was at the I have a Dream speech and was arrested during the civil rights movement. He has a story to tell.

I think what will undo Sanders is that he is too far to the left and has been too associated with radical politics. It will turn off some democrats, and scare others that they won't win the general election.

[alfred russel]

If the aura goes, then people will start paying a lot of attention to Sanders in a way they haven't previously.

Which is the point at which I think Hillary wins (assuming the email scandal doesn't blow up). People may not love hillary, but she is the best candidate of the two.

[Razgovory]

I strongly suspect that Clinton will clean up in the South.

We shall see. Populism plays well in the South.

Blacks are going to go for Hillary. 

[Barrister]

Nate Silver says Bernie has like a 4% chance to win in South Carolina and he still heavily favors HRC to win the nomination.

It'll be crushing to Bernie's momentum when he loses like 6 of the 7 primaries after NH, not to mention it'll also generate a significant delegate lead for Clinton. Also not to mention, the 15% of delegates who are superdelegates, almost all of whom are pledged to Hillary, won't jump off her ship in a close delegate race. They'll only jump to Bernie if he clearly has the weight of voters behind them (like they did for Obama in 2008 when it was obvious he was going to rack up more pledged delegates than HRC.)

Silver's key point is Bernie has yet to show any real effort to attract minority votes. Class based populism, for whatever reason, doesn't resonate with darkie.

Until Iowa, Clinton had a big lead among minority voters in 2008. Most people haven't started to pay attention yet. There is still a good chance that Sanders is going to do quite well with minority voters - he was at the I have a Dream speech and was arrested during the civil rights movement. He has a story to tell.

I think what will undo Sanders is that he is too far to the left and has been too associated with radical politics. It will turn off some democrats, and scare others that they won't win the general election.

Iread somewhere that the best and worst things about Sanders is that he has been so remarkably consistent in his positions over the years.  You can go look at speaches from 30 years ago and he sounds like he's talking today.  That gets him some real credibility.

But it also means he can't pivot or change his views to try and appeal to other groups.  He's incapable of trying to pick up the "black lives matter" mantle.

[garbon]

[DGuller]

If the aura goes, then people will start paying a lot of attention to Sanders in a way they haven't previously.

Which is the point at which I think Hillary wins (assuming the email scandal doesn't blow up). People may not love hillary, but she is the best candidate of the two.

Problem is that she's not a good candidate, as in campaigner.  In politics, someone with ideas is more appealing than someone without ideas.  Even if those ideas are fairly bad.  Hillary, fairly or not, does not appear to be a person with ideas, at least not ones deeply held. 

Another factor is personality.  Sanders is without a doubt a much better human being than Hillary, there is just no way around that.

[Syt]

She's a bit old to be Evita, I think.

[alfred russel]

But it also means he can't pivot or change his views to try and appeal to other groups.  He's incapable of trying to pick up the "black lives matter" mantle.

I don't think the "black lives matter" movement is at all out of line with this previous views (which I am not an expert on, however). I think he should be able to draw on a long career of supporting minority causes, and if he wants to play hardball, the 2008 primary between Clinton and Obama got a bit nasty on the racial front, in South Carolina in particular, and that can be pointed out.

[garbon]

If the aura goes, then people will start paying a lot of attention to Sanders in a way they haven't previously.

Which is the point at which I think Hillary wins (assuming the email scandal doesn't blow up). People may not love hillary, but she is the best candidate of the two.

Problem is that she's not a good candidate, as in campaigner.  In politics, someone with ideas is more appealing than someone without ideas.  Even if those ideas are fairly bad.  Hillary, fairly or not, does not appear to be a person with ideas, at least not ones deeply held. 

Another factor is personality.  Sanders is without a doubt a much better human being than Hillary, there is just no way around that.

Wake me up when someone asks what accountant things about social cues. :

[garbon]

She's a bit old to be Evita, I think.

I think that base image is the one that showed up in 2008.

[DGuller]

Iread somewhere that the best and worst things about Sanders is that he has been so remarkably consistent in his positions over the years.  You can go look at speaches from 30 years ago and he sounds like he's talking today.  That gets him some real credibility.

But it also means he can't pivot or change his views to try and appeal to other groups.  He's incapable of trying to pick up the "black lives matter" mantle.

That doesn't at all jive with what I've read on him (which admittedly is not that much).  My understanding is that he actually mellowed quite a bit.  He started out as a real socialist and over time became essentially a social democrat.  He's also been quite a pragmatic mayor, which is not at all what you would expect from an ideologue.

As for "black lives matter" mantle, I think he's been wearing it all along.  From what I understand he's been consistently a real social libertarian.

[alfred russel]

Problem is that she's not a good candidate, as in campaigner.  In politics, someone with ideas is more appealing than someone without ideas.  Even if those ideas are fairly bad.  Hillary, fairly or not, does not appear to be a person with ideas, at least not ones deeply held. 

Another factor is personality. 

This is why I thought O'Malley would ultimately win or at least do well.

Anyway, right now the race is a referendum on Hillary, with the "no to Hillary" camp being an old guy that gives every indication of being a well meaning true believer. I'm not shocked she is losing that. However, eventually Sanders is going to get tough scrutiny, and he is a bad general election candidate.

[Barrister]

Another factor is personality.  Sanders is without a doubt a much better human being than Hillary, there is just no way around that.

What makes you say that?

Sanders is divorced, was a single dad who was not married to the boy's mother.  He long-ago wrote an article somewhat sympathetic to rape.

I'm not saying he's a bad man.  But I don't see how you can say one is morally a better person than the other (unless you believe Hillary murdered Vince Foster).