2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumWho was Hillary Clinton aiming at? Women and ascendant voters
June 13, 2015 1:56 PM
Hillary Clinton will never win the presidency on the sheer force of lofty rhetoric, as her announcement speech demonstrated Saturday.
But if she does win the White House, it will be because she accomplished what her speech set out to do: harness the demographic shifts afoot in the country and deepen voters understanding of the best-known woman in the world.
Clinton highlighted a laundry list of proposals attractive to ascendant voting groups that formed the political base for her Democratic predecessor Barack Obama and began to show their strength under her husband Bill Clinton. She offered multiple indications that she was prepared to fight for those seeking a foothold, even if that contradicted her simultaneous pledge to usher in a new and more collaborative political future for the country.
-----
Part of Clintons challenge through 2016 will be to navigate Obamas positives and negatives. The president, at his heights, inspired far more passion in his followers than Clinton does in hers, but he also drew antagonists with a fierceness that Clinton would like to avoid. On Saturday, she attempted to corral Obamas voters while also acknowledging the shortcomings of his tenure.
http://www.latimes.com/nation/politics/politicsnow/la-pn-hillary-clinton-analysis-20150613-story.html
peacebird
(14,195 posts)And frankly better than she did. With more meat, and authenticity.
If everyone who says they think Bernie is the best choice, works and votes FOR Bernie., he will win.
ellisonz
(27,711 posts)...is assessing Hillary's political strategy, not Bernie's. Would you care to discuss Hillary? lol
peacebird
(14,195 posts)brooklynite
(94,601 posts)25% perhaps?
peacebird
(14,195 posts)a possibly bump for the launch event
Cleita
(75,480 posts)she stops short of alienating her money donors. So her strategy is trying to be all things to everyone but keeping the cash flowing. Okay, I'm sure there is a more elegant way of putting this but this is what I heard. Bernie, OTOH, says some of the same things. Actually, he did say it first, but he makes it clear that he's going to make the 1% pay for reforms and I believe that's because he isn't looking for any donations from them. I know you don't want comparisons to Bernie, but I can't describe what I think Hillary is aiming at without making those comparisons.
ellisonz
(27,711 posts)TM99
(8,352 posts)Sanders will tax them.
Will Clinton? No, she is schmoozing the 1%.
How is she going to help us, the 99%?
ellisonz
(27,711 posts)...by providing support and political coattails from record turnout among the traditional Democratic coalition.
If we can't get big turnout and make gains in Congress, nothing will happen.
How does Bernie Sanders help a moderate Democrat in a Red State?
TM99
(8,352 posts)control for at least another 5 to possibly 10 years.
You think the coat tails will come from Clinton. I think they will better come from Sanders. Given that neo-liberals LOST big in 2014, I am confident that I am more correct in my assessment.
What a bizarre question? What do you mean? How does Clinton help a 'moderate Democrat in a Red State'?
The better question is how does Sander help the 90% of us, no matter what our orientation, race, gender, political affiliation, etc., in all states versus Clinton. Easy. Clinton speaks about social justice and the veneer of progressivism yet will continue neo-liberal economic policies and neo-conservative foreign policies that will harm us all. Sanders speaks about social AND economic justice for ALL of us in the 90%.
ellisonz
(27,711 posts)It's not bizarre at all. How does having a self-proclaimed socialist as a nominee help a Democratic Congressional candidate in a swing-district in a Red State? Hillary will undoubtedly get strong turnout from women. How does Bernie win this election given the political landscape? You can ignore that landscape, it just makes your last paragraph seem hollow.It's one thing to speak, it's another to do! The Republicans are very real and they will fight bitterly.
brooklynite
(94,601 posts)TM99
(8,352 posts)the reality that 'liberal' and 'progressive' positions WON in 2014. Third Way centrist positions did not.
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2014/11/06/1342721/-The-Real-Story-of-the-2014-Election-Who-Lost
How does Clinton, an avowed centrist and Third Wayer, win?
The GOP through gerrymandering have control over the house. Dems lost the senate due to the reasons presented in the linked to article.
If given the choice, Democrats and Independents and Greens are going to choose a liberal progressive Democratic candidate over Republican lite which is definitely what HRC is.
DhhD
(4,695 posts)lawmakers; those who support the People and not the Elite/Royalist. On Third of the seats of Congress will be on the Nov 2016 ballot. Candidates that support the People will be on the down tickets.
brooklynite
(94,601 posts)I've met virtually all of our Senate candidates, and with the exception of Russ Feingold, I don't think they meet your exacting specifications/
awoke_in_2003
(34,582 posts)and Hillary does possess a good one, knows the demographics are shifting and you'd better shift with them. The pukes know they are shifting, but don't care- they depend on their propaganda machine (MSM), black box voting, and gerrymandering to push them over.
ellisonz
(27,711 posts)And perhaps, let me posit this idea: it takes a machine to fight a machine
Emily Grierson
(34 posts)and she hit a grand slam.