Expectations.

I heard about the 14 staffers, but I took that as a strategic inside politics matter. If they can't win SC, I think it's over for her. And if that's the case, she should drop out now so someone else can run.

Biden is a guy who likely could unite the party around him.

with the credit card industry???

That Biden????

Puh-leeze.

But he doesn't have the baggage of the Clintons. There is not an open FBI investigation against him.

The whole get someone else is nonsense.

But it is very clear the Establishment of the party doesn't want him. Hopefully the voters continue to ignore them.

I doubt many voters even know what it is.

He runs, he has my support.

A few of us will be joining them after Nevada so by the time we get there and the Black Caucus folks coming, there will be about 4000 of us. Most of the volunteers started in September and October.

Pesky little things.

and they will vote for the other one.

I believe the approved term is Area Man.

As in, headlines from the New Hampshire win: Clinton Places a Strong Second to Area Man.

We've already got 'someone else!'

But, she will never drop out.

Unless he can get the magic number of delegates without super-delegates.

Her campaign has been consistent, if nothing else.

Expect going even lower

CNN is reporting that Sanders has a much larger staff in NV as well... Just now.

Is Clinton campaign didn't expect the race to get this far. They were going to bluff their win to a win by preventing serious candidates joining b/c of overwhelming money raised, institutional , and establishment support. They poured majority of their resources into Iowa/NH hoping for knock out blow.

When their bubble was burst in Iowa/NH, if you notice they pivoted their messaging not to NV/SC but rather March contests. They are ramping up, and hoping to turn the tide in March when they are many contests at the same time.

IIRC her campaign announced she had a couple dozen major fundraisers to do and the story was 80% of her resources had been spent on IA and the Brooklyn HQ.

It certainly sounds like she'll let surrogates and commercial advertising fight for SC. I'm not sure if that's because she thinks she has a comfortable lead in SC, or if by comparison to super-Tuesday SC isn't big enough to fight over.

Personally, I'm of the opinion that Sanders with a third win and a close second becomes a fire so big he'll be making his own weather. The up-draft of that success will draw in support like a tornado.

EXEMPLIFIED

back in 2008 there were more than 20 states voting on superTuesday, that meant by the end of the counting more than half the states had held their primary/caucus.

in 2004 there were only 7 states voting on superTuesday

and in 2016 it's just over a dozen.

More than half the states will still be in play after superTuesday this year.

The public wants change. The public wants reform. Clinton would be an excellent president if the times called for a status quo leader.

not so much.

Sanders can compete with Clinton in single states, where he can make voters aware of him, increase his public profile, etc. Super Tuesday is a different story. Clinton enjoys an advantage there because voters know her and don't know Sanders, and Sanders cannot blanket all those states at once. In Sanders' favor, he will realize a lot of publicity by winning South Carolina, where Clinton was supposed to not only stop him, but drive the stake in his heart. It will be interesting to see if a huge upset in South Carolina will give Sanders the boost he needs to compete on Super Tuesday. I am betting the media react to his SC win by saying it's a fluke, the streak stops on Super Tuesday, etc. Clinton is banking on name recognition, endorsements, etc. and she is also betting that Super Tuesday is too big and too broad for Sanders to get his message to enough voters to overturn the party machine. But SC might put the blood in the water and attract too many sharks. Imagine that. A democratic socialist as a presidential candidate on the ballot of a major party. I never thought I would live to see that.

HRC has not.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/12511030685

As for the media calling a strong SC showing a fluke, it's a little hard to sell four flukes in a row, if he indeed beats expectations every time.

I would be shocked if Bernie wins SC. I think all of this is to convert winning a safe state to a big deal.

Oops, I failed.

...just imagine how poor she'd be running an administration. Scarey thought.

n/t

So this OP just makes us look dumb. :&gt )

Somewhere I saw an article with a discussion about it...


However,,,

heh, heh... Bernie is a smart cookie.

Don't underestimate me
That sold me on him. I like confident people, I'm a confident person so why wouldn't I like others that share this trait

The parts about "abandoning" and "downplaying"?

There was an interview with a black female correspondent who talked about the Clintons trying to downplay SC. Those were her words.

I didn't write down their names.

The abandoning thing was my interpretation of what they they said:

No staff in SC
Downplaying SC
Focusing on March

You can choose a different word if you'd like.

Thanks

But, here I do.
It is definitely hogwash.

I think it probably means both. She can't afford to give up on South Carolina without a fight, I suspect she ia confident she can win there but not by a margin convincing enough to seriously hobble Sanders - which means she has to go for a knockout blow on Super Tuesday. If that doesn't wok she will have a very serious problem on her hands.

80% are African-American. So now it's a super Tuesday firewall, eh?

http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/warning-signs-hillary-clinton-south-carolina

Thanks!

In spite of recent talk about Nevada and now SC being in play, Hillary's odds have not budged. 82% for the nomination today, 82% a month ago. And just for good measure, about the same odds for SC itself, and Hillary also still the favorite in Nevada.

Odds from predictwise.com

predictwise predicted Hillary's win in Iowa and Bernie's win in New Hampshire.

she didn't win iowa.it was tie after voting ilregulrs and charges of voter fraud.even nate silver now has nevada as 50/50

Look i still except her to likely win SC but bernie could make it close.

Sorry a win is a win.

Also Nate's current Nevada prediction is based on one low rating push poll.

This is not a "betting" website. They are not bettors. You cannot bet on their information.

Currently there are no betting odds at any outlet for South Carolina on the Democratic side. The Republicans do have odds out.

Sanders is currently a 5/2 (2.5/1) shot to win the nomination which is about 23% chance. Slight difference, but a difference nonetheless.

...not to mention the SuperBowl.

To bad.

the best part is that when she tries to raise more its pointed out online and she is shamed.

Instead, she is now throwing super PAC money at the problem, to defeat a candidate powered by the people.

That's probably one of the most favorable states in the union for her. High AA, moderate dems, southern.

They had her winning IA and he winning NH.

If not, they are just glorified online guessing/poll sites and not worth spit in predictive value.

The betters don't mean shit.

Winds of change feeding the flames!

on the notion that you're inevitable, then you might feel you don't really have to run a real campaign. If you think you can intimidate any other potential candidate, you think you can just coast.

But if, surprise surprise, someone actually challenges your inevitability, it can cost you your inevitability.

Hillary Clinton and all her supporters got quite arrogant in the early days because of her presumed inevitability. Then when Sanders really did decide to jump in they just dismissed him as not a serious candidate, and of course his polling numbers were all in the low single digits. In various posts here on DU many of us tried to point out that for a very long time that was a factor of name recognition, but we were pooh-poohed about that. Then they said he wasn't going to make any headway because he didn't have the ground game in place that she had. Well, it seems as though a lot of that ground game was smoke and mirrors.

If she actually loses SC and Nevada, the possibility of her dropping out grows exponentially, although probably not until the Super Tuesday results are in. Of course, no matter what happens along the way, she could still choose to stay in until the bitter end, and we'll see a clear revival of the Living De--I mean the PUMAs.

This is why I don't find any controversy in Bernie saying "you're not in the White House yet" at the debate. Her campaign has been ridiculously arrogant with a massive sense of entitlement from the beginning.

between those who say: Don't vote for her just because she's a woman, vote for her because she's the most qualified candidate! (Which I happen to disagree with, but still, that's an opinion a person can hold) and then you get people like Madeline Albright and Gloria Steinem saying basically: If you're a woman you MUST vote for her! qualifications be damned.

And yes, as a 67 year old woman I would love to see a woman President in my lifetime. But not just any woman.

A while back, when Bernie was first getting in, I kept on pointing out that there is not the sort of vast yearning out there for a woman as President to the point where women will simply vote for women. If Hillary is the nominee, huge numbers of Republican women will NOT cross party lines to vote for her just because of her gender. And far too many Hillary supporters are completely blind to that, totally dismissing how incredibly disliked she is out there.

I just hope Bernie does so amazingly well in Nevada and South Carolina that his nomination is pretty much a foregone conclusion even before Super Tuesday.

Looking more and more like Sanders can take Nevada AND SC. That's a lot of momentum heading in to Super Tuesday, with a few big money bombs preceding.

'As of last week, the Clinton campaign had only two campaign offices in South Carolina: one in Charleston and another in the capital, Columbia, with just 14 full-time staffers including state director Clay Middleton. The campaign also has nine “get out the vote” sites – smaller-scale sites devoted to turnout – across the state.

The Sanders campaign, meanwhile, had 240 staffers on the ground as of last week – 80 percent of them African-American – spread across 10 offices statewide.

“That’s real infrastructure,” said one veteran South Carolina political consultant who was involved in the 2008 effort to elect Barack Obama and who spoke on background. “[Donald] Trump lost Iowa because his campaign didn’t have infrastructure and Ted Cruz did. That’s what gets people to the polls. And Hillary is the very person who should know about infrastructure, because that’s how she lost to Obama in 2008 in the first place.”'

http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/warning-signs-hillary-clinton-south-carolina

bernie won that debate.

you are buying the beer on election night when HRC wins...no soy marinnera soy capitan, soy capitan.....there's no crying in baseball (tom hanks) a league of their own...