Nate Silver: Hillary Clinton Doesn’t Have A Problem On Her Left
Hillary Clinton’s recent hawkish comments about foreign policy, in which she expressed some disagreements with President Obama, have inspired reporting and speculation that liberal Democrats will grow disillusioned with her ahead of a possible presidential bid in 2016. There is a ”pattern that has emerged in almost every recent interview Clinton has given: liberals walk away unnerved,” Ezra Klein wrote at Vox.
The Vox headline proclaimed that Clinton is “not inevitable” — that is, not the inevitable Democratic nominee. That’s right, narrowly speaking. Few things are inevitable, and Clinton’s nomination is no exception. Although she’s performing most or all of the activities that we’d associate with a future presidential candidate, she’s not yet officially declared for the race and could still decide against doing so. She could have health problems, or a heretofore unknown scandal could emerge, or she could decide that the 2016 climate has become grim enough for Democrats that the nomination isn’t worth seeking.
But the odds that a challenger will emerge from the left flank of the Democratic Party and overtake Clinton remain low.
--- snip: recent polling showing Clinton strong numbers among liberals ---
... if there’s been a meaningful change in how rank-and-file liberal Democrats perceive Clinton, you’d have to squint to see it. Perhaps more important, it’s extremely rare to see a non-incumbent candidate poll so strongly so early. In the earliest stages of the 2008 Democratic nomination race, Clinton was polling between 25 percent and 40 percent of the vote — not between 60 percent and 70 percent, as she is now. Clinton could lose quite a bit of Democratic support and still be in a strong position.
But suppose you see those polls as a lagging indicator. Another early measure of a candidate’s strength that can have predictive power is the amount of support she receives from elites in her party, as measured by endorsements from elected officials. Clinton, despite not having declared her candidacy, has already picked up 60 endorsements from Democrats in Congress. As far as I can tell, there isn’t any precedent for something like this. A database of primary endorsements we compiled in 2012 found only a handful of endorsements of a presidential candidate so early in the race.
Moreover, these endorsements are coming from across the Democratic Party’s ideological spectrum, including some of the most liberal Democrats.... Regardless of ideology, every Democratic woman in the Senate has endorsed Clinton — ranging from very liberal Democrats like Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren to relatively conservative ones like Louisiana Sen. Mary Landrieu. (If she appeals in the same way to women in the electorate, who made up a majority of Democratic primary voters in 2008, she’ll be well positioned in 2016.)
But aren’t Democrats growing more liberal? Yes, there’s some evidence they are... Democrats could get quite a bit more liberal without being at risk of leaving Clinton behind. Her base is broad and includes not only coastal liberals but also groups such as baby-boomer women and working-class Democrats whose views tend toward the center-left... But for Clinton to lose the Democratic nomination for ideological reasons would require a pronounced leftward shift in the party — something close to an ideological realignment — and not incremental change over the next two years.
http://fivethirtyeight.com/datalab/hillary-clinton-doesnt-have-a-problem-on-her-left/
= new reply since forum marked as read
Must be because it's early!
The Doom and Gloom club just love to quote him when he says that the loss of the Senate to the GOP is entirely possible, but when he says things like this, well, he gets stuffed under that bus in a big way!!!
All that is needed is to proclaim one's Democratic registration to avoid it being applied sadly.
It is a sign of the times, it is a sign of the sharp rightward shift of the party, all we can do is try to adapt and argue leftist policies that historically have been the only policies that have ever appeared to work for more than just the extremely wealthy. 
DU was formed in the days after the 2000 GOP coup d-etat as an anti-establishment forum for American dissidents, attracting not just those who disagreed with the Bush v. Gore decision, but every other group and voice which had an anti-establishment axe to grind. It was great! LOL
When Obama won the presidency, however, this changed as we know.
Part of that change may be a function of the fact that DU comprises a group of people who informally pledge fealty to a party whose leader is now the most powerful person in the world. In light of that, people here would be generally expected to 'work within the system'. Thus, the pro-establishment (and even authoritarian) vibe.
So Hillary's support here will only get stronger, over time. That doesn't mean that you and/or I need to do so, but just be aware that if she is selected as the nominee, the administrators and others here more generally will demand that you either support her openly, or if you can't do that, then you must remain silent until after the general election is over.
Peace to you.
Bookmarked.....
