The ridiculousness of Hillary Clinton’s expand-the-map strategy in 2016

[cali]

Talking Points Memo's Dylan Scott interviewed Mitch Stewart, the former battleground states director of President Obama's reelection campaign and now a member of the Hillary Clinton campaign-in-waiting known as "Ready for Hillary," about how the 2016 electoral map could be expanded in Democrats' favor if the former secretary of state is, as expected, the party's presidential nominee.

<snip>

The first bucket of states is ridiculous. The second is plausible -- but almost certainly not in 2016. Let's take them in order.

<snip>

Arkansas is a good example. It's easy to assume -- and the Clintons almost certainly are assuming -- that the former first couple of Arkansas have a special connection to the Natural State. After all, Bill Clinton spent years as the state's governor and used it as a launching pad for his presidential bid in 1992.

That was a very long time ago. And even in the past six years, Arkansas has moved heavily away from Democrats at the federal level. In 2008, both U.S. senators from Arkansas were Democrats, as were three of its four House members. Following the 2014 elections, all six are Republicans. ALL SIX. President Obama won just 37 percent of the vote in the state in the 2012 general election after watching someone named John Wolfe win 42 percent of the vote in the Democratic presidential primary against him.

<snip>

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/wp/2014/11/17/the-ridiculousness-of-hillary-clintons-expand-the-map-strategy-in-2016/

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

1. But..but..moving to the right caused the glorious Democratic victory in 2014...oh..wait.

[NYC_SKP]

2. If we move any further right, we'll be pining for the Nixon Era. nt

[Scuba]

3. We just didn't move far enough right. Yeah, that' it.

[hrmjustin]

4. I think that AR maybe a reach but AZ, MO, IN, NC, and GA are in reach for her.

[cali]

5. AZ perhaps. But no, the others are a stretch.

[hrmjustin]

6. Not really. NC and IN went dem in 2008 and Mo almost did.

GA's demographics are changing.

[cali]

8. this isn't 2008. and as Cilizza says, Georgia just ain't there yet- and the recent election

demonstrates that.

[hrmjustin]

9. Well it is possible.

Probably won't happen in all those states but maybe at least one.

[LonePirate]

17. Cillizza is wrong by expecting GA 2016 voting demographics to mirror GA 2014 voting demos.

The overall voting populace will be considerably younger and less white in 2016 than in 2014. In GA, Clinton will improve on Nunn's numbers with Hispanics by 15-20 points and she will improve on the numbers with whites by at least 10-15. GA will not be a guaranteed win for the Repubs in 2016. They will win by a small margin (2-3 pts or fewer) or Clinton will win. There will be no Repub win by 5+ pts. I think NC will have a projected winner before GA does on 2016 election night.

AZ is pretty much the same way. AR is almost definitely staying red.

KY is my surprise Dem pick-up if Clinton runs. McConnell's race was a fluke. Dems maintained the KY House this year and also hold the governorship. It borders blue IL, OH and VA which trumps its red borders with IN, MO and TN.

AK is my second choice for a surprise Dem pick-up.

[Jamastiene]

21. NC going Dem in 2008 was a fluke.

Look back at NC's history in presidential elections. Most of the time, it goes Republican for those. Even my normally very blue county, elections are starting to go to Republicans over Democrats. Gerrymandering is keeping some of that going, but a lot of it is just how overly conservative most of NC really is. It is a very conservative state and they do pick Republicans most of the time over Dems.

[Jim Lane]

23. NC in 2012 was Romney's narrowest win.

Romney beat Obama by about two percent (50.39% to 48.35%). That makes North Carolina an obvious target for trying to add states to Obama's 2012 win. It especially stands out because Romney's next-smallest margin, in Georgia, was almost eight percent (53.30% to 45.48%).

Regardless of who wins the Democratic nomination, though, his or her first priority will indeed be to play defense -- to hold the states that Obama won twice. The nominee can even afford to drop 62 electoral votes from that base and still win. That means if the Republicans hold North Carolina and Georgia, hold everything else that Romney won, and flip Ohio and Virginia and Florida... the Democrat still wins.

[Cali_Democrat]

12. Unfortunately for you, your track record for predicting these things is not very good

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=1581859

Mine on the other hand...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=1582005

[cali]

15. actually, my record is much better than yours. I've made dozens of predictions

most of them correct. and I called this recent election. How about you, dear?

[Cali_Democrat]

16. Link to back up your assertion that "my record is much better than yours"?

I can provide links.

You, on the other hand, are unable to.

BTW, do you still follow Michele Catalano on twitter?

[Jamastiene]

20. Wrong.

Maybe you don't know this, but most conservadems in NC despise Hillary. Republicans* start frothing at the mouth in NC if you mention her. There is just no way she'd get NC in a general election. If among Dems only, there may be a chance of her winning a primary here, depending on who she is running against, but in a general election, there is no way in God's green hell she'd stand a chance at taking NC.

*Let's not forget when Jesse Helms said that Clinton had better bring a bodyguard if he visited NC. He was referring to then President Bill Clinton, but they hate Hillary even more than Bill here and that includes many conservative Democrats. A handful of slightly moderate Democrats here might like her, but conservadems and Republicans here hate her for opposite reasons. After all, she is a mouthy, bossy woman who doesn't "know her place" according to them. If you don't believe me, go pick an average small town NC native and talk to them. It will make your head spin, some of the nonsensical, hateful crap that comes tumbling out when they open their mouths.

[JaneyVee]

7. I thought we were for 50 state strategies.

[geek tragedy]

10. You can't expand the map if you don't try

Who honestly thought NC and IN would be in play in 2008?

[MohRokTah]

11. The ridiculousness of Chris Cillizza's analysis about the expand the map strategy.

Seriously, he's got it as wrong as when pundits called the Obama 2008 campaign insane for going after Virginia and North Carolina.

[hfojvt]

13. Obama has not been popular in Arkansas

because he beat Clinton in the primary. It's possible that he dragged down the other Democrats there too, as their opponents likely tied them to Obama.

In 2004, Kerry got 44.6% of the vote. In 2008, Obama got only 39% in 2008.

Look, for a similar example, at Arizona. In 2012, Romney got 53.5% of the vote. In 2000, Bush only got 50.95%. Some Arizonans seemed to be upset about Bush's primary win over McCain.

I would be surprised in Clinton's could not make progress in Arkansas.

[pampango]

14. She is not my first choice but I don't see that the map looks any worse for her than it does

for Warren or Sanders. Democrats are going to have a tough time in the South no matter who our candidate is. And quite honestly that's OK. If we had a candidate who was competitive in the South, I doubt most of us would think much of the policies of that candidate.

[Thinkingabout]

18. Good post and to the point.

[Robbins]

19. I don't buy the extend the map

The 2016 race will be fought in same states as 2012.

The south is lost to dems except for virginia and florida.Possibly NC.

Dems should say out of missouri my state.Just like being in deep south is waste of time.

The clintons need to worry about getting the obama voters.