2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumRollingstone: WTF Happened to Hillary Clinton in Michigan, Explained
"Overcoming a consensus 21-point deficit in the polls, and odds against winning pegged at 99:1, Bernie Sanders stormed to victory over Hillary Clinton in the Michigan primary Tuesday night. Sanders' stunning upset win has altered the momentum of the Democratic race. Will it be enough to change the delegate math?
Last night was huge!
http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/wtf-happened-to-hillary-clinton-in-michigan-explained-20160309
nichomachus
(12,754 posts)With some mathematical chicanery, the Democrats will lose the White House, the Congress, and the Supreme Court. Say hello to President Trump.
freebrew
(1,917 posts)Le Taz Hot
(22,271 posts)because there will be a mass exodus out of the party. The Democratic Party will be no more.
musiclawyer
(2,335 posts)Bernie is trying to resuscitate the Dems. The country will soon be majority independent ....Forever
Parties are vestigial and of no use to people who want government to serve them and not corporations. Disagree? Ask your kids or grandkids. It's their future and they won't tolerate the one we have accepted for decades. And frankly in the long run we are all dead and what they think is more important than what elders think. The democratic and republican parties as currently constructed are dead. May they stay that way .....
Punkingal
(9,522 posts)Bad campaign, ignoring much of Michigan and also the lies and pandering didn't seem to work as well as they thought it would.
HooptieWagon
(17,064 posts)The results among registered Democrats wasn't too far off the polls...Clinton 57-41. But among Independants, Sanders just killed HRC...71-28. We're gonna need those Independants to vote for our candidate if we're going to win in Nov....Hillary isn't going to get it done. Also, youth turnout was exceptionally strong, and goes heavily for Sanders. Pollsters apparently aren't modelling youth turnout and Independants very well.
Lizzie Poppet
(10,164 posts)Some of these polls are landline only, ferchrissakes. I can't even imagine how skewed a cross-section of young voters you'd get with something like that.
dana_b
(11,546 posts)None of my daughter's friends who live on their own do either. They're going the way of the Dodo bird!
kenfrequed
(7,865 posts)It isn't just mobile culture, it is also the means by which we inform ourselves.
Most people under the age of 45 no longer bother with traditional cable news outlets. TYT attracts more from that crowd and online written works and news surfing is the method we use.
In that way the cable news networks report polls that are collected from a lot of land lines. Sort of a bad cycle which probably helps explain this contortion and underrepresentation of younger voters who have done research on their candidates.
pat_k
(9,313 posts)beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)Michigan voters aren't stupid, they know who's been fighting for them for decades.
fun n serious
(4,451 posts)Not Bernie. What has he done for Michigan?
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)At the Democrats debate Sunday night in Flint, Michigan, Hillary Clintons tone was mocking. She razzed Bernie Sanders for wallowing in the past. The septuagenarian Vermonter, she said, seemed to want to argue about the 1990s instead of talking about the future. She said shed prefer the latter, because I think every election is about the future. Michigan voters, however, disagreed.
In a surprise result, Sanders eked out a narrow win in the Wolverine State on Tuesday, despite polls showing him trailing by wide margins in the days leading up to the vote. The vote shows Sanders understood the desire of many Michigan voters to re-litigate those old 1990s fights, particularly when it comes to trade. And it raises some red flags for the Clinton campaign going into Ohio and Illinois, which have more delegates but many of the same complaints about the free trade 90s, which were brought about by another Clinton.
One of the most striking data points out of the Michigan exit polls is the sizable majority of voters who said they believe trade with other countries takes away U.S. jobs. In the CNN survey, 58 percent of Democrats agreed with that statement, as did 55 percent of Republicans. Sanders won anti-trade voters by double digits on the Democratic side, and Donald Trump did so on the Republican side.
The Rust Belt, once the beating heart of American manufacturing, continues to blame trade deals for the industrys decline. And Americas era of free trade agreements really kicked off with the NAFTA agreement, which created a trade bloc consisting of the United States, Canada and Mexico in 1994. One of the leading supporters of that deal: President Bill Clinton.
http://www.newsweek.com/michigan-bernie-sanders-trade-435217
Apparently his record of fighting for the working class was GOOD ENOUGH, BERNIE!
The question is why wasn't Hillary?
fun n serious
(4,451 posts)It's what he hasn't done, I guess..
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)He hasn't supported disastrous trade deals that ravaged the rust-belt, he hasn't abandoned labor and taken millions from Wall Street, he hasn't forgotten the little guy in a personal quest for riches and suddenly remembered Michigan in time for photo-ops during the primary.
I knew you were an it-getter!
fun n serious
(4,451 posts)He can't run on what he HAS done. He has to run on what he hasn't done. He hasn't gotten dirty to get a job done...Or he hasn't gotten a job done.
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)Anyone who claims Bernie hasn't supported labor is either delusional or dishonest.
kenfrequed
(7,865 posts)Were I you I would probably stick to discussing and debating on the issues that you can actually possibly win on.
Jefferson23
(30,099 posts)better than the campaign even anticipated.