The latest polls show H pulling away there but there are some pre-Benghazi and Biden polls showing it tight. A fresh batch should shed more light.

Other than that, I heard his Google Analytics are showing great numbers.

Losing Iowa and winning NH doesn't do much for him. It will be easy for the Hillary campaign to discount NH as being "East Sanderstan" and not representative of any of the other states in the country. Furthermore he's toast in SC.. he has done alot campaigning there and still only in the single digits in the polls. A win in NH doesn't really help him much there. With a big loss in SC I think its all downhill for Sanders.

So they won't vote for him. Wait... Am I thinking of the right candidate?

Media, pundits, "journalists," elected politicians, almost anyone who's comfortable yet fearful - all these will somehow reject Bernie's very clear and true message.

Think about what American society has become since Reagan, and it's easy to understand.

and he's exceeded expectations repeatedly. I'll take your query as a good sign.

Everyone who might support him already is supporting him. I really don't see anyplace else he can get additional support.
As much as I've always liked Bernie the person and Bernie the politician, I'm voting for the person who gives us the best chance to win the White House. Hillary wins that argument hands down. End of Story.

Bros With Man Buns

post nothing but echoes of the slimiest Hill Team memes.

Lemme know when a Hillary supporter tells me she will win 50 states, or how all the "gorgeous guys" are supporting her, and I'll laugh at that too.
And I apologize if you are indeed sporting a man bun.
It wasn't personal.

I can't remember, who are you supporting again?

A Clinton Iowa win will give her momentum to win new hampshire.

An iowa and nh loss will weaken her and give sanders the attention and momentum to win later states.

Will lose New Hampshire on momentum and then he won't win a single state.

Hillary can lower expectations in both states, say Sanders threw all his eggs in those baskets because he has no money and organization elsewhere and then ride out losses in both states and pick it back up in Nevada, South Carilina and Super Tuesday states, all places where she leads by massive margins and there are large numbers of minority voters which are her strength.

There isn't enough time for Sanders to reverse her massive lead in South Carolina after Iowa and New Hampshire. Hillary's South Carolina win will give her momentum into Super Tuesday where Bernie does not have the money or organization to compete.

eom

the Establishment cannot control and manipulate turnout to stadiums, arenas, rallies, etc.

Where does Clinton show traction in those places beyond the Establishment's control?

Ask President Dean.

what was perhaps the main reason Dean lost traction: The Establishment's professional "image manipulators" went to work on him, endlessly repeating a media clip and narrative about a "scream" (that I believe was unflattering partly because of a distorting, third-rate sound system at a campaign rally).

....that "the scream" happened after his mediocre performance in the Iowa Caucus, being unable to convert his rally crowds into voters and coming in third.

Preface before I go into 2004 stuff: I think it is highly likely Bernie will win the 2016 Iowa caucus. Going to depend a lot on GOTV efforts.

I was at 2004 Iowa caucus. Live in a very liberal county.

Believe it or not, Kerry was a much better campaigner in Iowa than Dean and that's how Kerry made his comeback in Iowa, as he was pretty much considered down and out by the political press. Better speaker, solid liberal on issues. He hung out after speeches and did not leave until every individual person who wanted to ask a question got to speak to him.

As brooklynite notes, Dean Scream debacle was after his loss in Iowa.

So here's the background on the Edwards thing:

At 2004 Iowa Caucus, Edwards and Kucinch made a deal to consolidate supporters. In otherwords, if one of them couldn't get a large enough number to be viable in the caucus, they urged there supporters to switch support to the others.

So at my precinct caucus, all folks who originally stood up for Dennis moved over to Edwards. That's the background on the whole Edwards thing.

...when she got as many votes as Barack Obama. And Bernie Sanders, nice as he is, is not Barack Obama.

Traction? It's a fantasy. He's done us all an incredible service by mounting this run and putting progressive issues at the fore. He is to be admired greatly for that work.

and for that we should ALL be and continue to be grateful to him.

I'm tired of all this shit.

The Democratic Party is choosing a flashy brand name, largely because too many people say "I really like Bernie's ideas and admire his honesty but Clinton is more electable."

So they'll go for the path of least resistance, the Clinton (TM) brand. And we'll have an election about nothing but keeping the Troglodyte GOP out of the WH. More Personality Tiger Beat politics. The heck with all that progressive populism shit. Push those "base liberals" off to the side again. Pay no attention to those big corporations buying the government once again. Feel good because she is a woman, and supports liberal social values (unless the polls on a particular issue indicate otherwise). Family values. Triangulation. Let's return to Those Fabulous 90's. (TM)


And maybe -- just maybe -- if the GOP doesn't screw the pooch, and Clinton fatigue doesn't set in again before November, she'll make it though the GE gauntlet, and we might be spared four years of President Republican, and instead have President Centrist. And the Oligarchy can breathe easy that once again they have an employee in the White House.

Poll numbers in large population states can be influenced by ads on the large media outlets. It is soft support and can shift fairly easily.

Lets see how the first couple contests go and what effect it has. If Bernie loses Iowa and New Hampshire then Hillary can pivot to the General that much sooner.

Lots of the numbers we are seeing this far out are not going to be the same once it comes time to vote.

Along with Vermont, NH, Maine, CT, Alaska, Idaho, Utah, CO and WVA.

Winning a single additional state. His only hope is to somehow sweep all four and hope that the momentum and buzz from that will make up for no money or organization to compete in the Super Tuesday states. It's a long shot even assuming a sweep and all of those things.

Problem for him is that he is significantly behind in three of those four states, the momentum is against him and has never been close in two of them.

He is 30-40 points behind in Iowa for instance, and if he loses there he won't win a single state.

...which has a Primary, rather than a Caucus. CT might also be a little too metropolitan to move away from Clinton.

I would add Minnesota to Bernie's list.

Just look at any online poll!!!

He won't be able to collect all those Southern delegates that Obama racked up in 2008. Right now I only see him doing well in New England, parts of the West and a few Midwestern states.

by the decades of crony capitalism that Bernie's calling out.

With a lot of undecided voters (46%). Probably because they are afraid to admit that they would vote for a Dem in the land of Inhofe.

Poll here.

you can believe your lying eyes all you like.
stick a fork, or better yet a spit.
savory.

corporate media for guidance. Everyone has heard of Clinton, we cannot say the same of Sanders. In comparison to the Repubs Clinton looks like a savior, Sanders ... who they hell is he?

We all know that Trump, and the Repub debates have consumed the mainstream media while the Dems fiddle in the back round.

Sometimes we are our own worst enemy when trying to advance issues, unless we Honestly do not want to advance an issue! Then we'll play the underdog and blame the 'other party' and let voters fall in line with the person who has name recognition.

I will give Clinton experience and polish, but she does not recognize the passion of getting it right from the beginning, and falls back on the mistake clause.

So setting aside what is covered by the corporate media and contrasting that to getting it right the first time ... I'll go with my gut instinct and getting it right the first time.

You are just making a case for the corporate media and those who do not have time to pay attention to politics 24/7 ... imho.

if I had to guess, he might do okay in places like the Bay Area and HumCo, but I don't see other parts of the state going in his favor.

in the fact that Hillary dumped TPP and Keystone because of PRESSURE he put on Hillary.

Don't vote for him, but what is this bullshit?

Concern?

justified.

...this is a political blog, and we discuss politics, which includes electoral tactics.

I keep being told that Sanders will be able to overcome the financial and political resources the Clinton campaign has, but without any details. "His message resonates with people" is a nice platitude, but since we vote State by State, it doesn't explain which States he'll be competitive in, and if your answer is "all of them", I'd say there's a disconnect between that assertion and months of polling data, not to mention the insight I've gotten from political notables like Russ Feingold.

BTW - feel free to keep questioning Clinton's ability to win; I don't consider it trolling and will be happy to debate it.

But he's frozen at 20-25% in ALL the polls (most likely a Clinton conspiracy because, well, she controls the media )

Sanders has shown remarkable traction to make it as far as he has. It has always been a real long shot for him to win the nomination over Hillary Clinton. His traction now is measured by the fact that he still is positioned to possibly win Iowa (where he is behind) and New Hampshire (where he is ahead). He is the only person running against Hillary Clinton who is given any real chance of winning the Democratic nomination. He has sufficient money, he has a strong volunteer movement, and he has a growing campaign organization in multiple states. For all practical purposes it is now a two way race that is Hillary's to lose and right now Hillary isn't losing it. But we are no where near the finish line yet. Hillary is coming off of an excellent month. Bernie didn't have a bad one though.

Sanders has gotten a lot more national exposure over the last month or so. He now is landing the big TV interviews that had been denied him earlier when it was all about waiting for Biden. He has been on major late night TV shows, he has been on major Day time TV shows. Generally he has been very well received. People tend to like him and that is a major hurdle for a politician pretty much still introducing himself to a national audience to clear. His favorably ratings remain positive while his name recognition increases.

Hillary had a good debate. I'm not surprised by that but it seems a lot of people were and therefor she exceeded expectations which always plays well. The Republicans gave Hillary a gift with their clumsy inquisition of her, and she seized it and ran with it. Talk about free positive publicity! Every month may not be as good for Clinton as this one was though. Sanders still remains viable as a dark horse alternative to her, and if you stand back and look at this realistically, that is pretty damn amazing.