Why Bernie Sanders Will Not Be Able to Pull Off the Upset

[BooScout]

http://www.vnews.com/home/17856155-95/column-why-bernie-sanders-will-not-be-able-to-pull-off-the-upset

Why Bernie Sanders Will Not Be Able to Pull Off the Upset

Hillary Clinton is once again campaigning for president as the prohibitive front-runner, and once again, she faces a challenge from an insurgent progressive outsider with grass-roots support. And once again, while Clinton (re)introduced herself to voters in a low-key listening tour of sorts, her challenger was drawing huge audiences —10,000 in Madison, Wis., 8,000 in Portland, Maine, 5,000 in Denver and overflow crowds in Iowa’s small towns and elsewhere.

Eight years ago, Clinton led in the polls for most of 2007, only to lose the Iowa caucuses — and, eventually, the Democratic nomination — to a favorite of the party’s progressive base. It’s feeling a bit like deja vu. “If she doesn’t change the terms of the race, she’s going to lose. Again,” former Mitt Romney strategist Stuart Stevens warned in the Daily Beast this month.

It may be tempting to compare the race between Clinton and Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., to the epic race between Clinton and Sen. Barack Obama: Sanders, like Obama, has consolidated a good portion of the liberal wing of the Democratic Party. Sanders, like Obama, is raising millions from small-dollar donors on the Internet. Sanders, like Obama, is channeling the anger and frustration of some in the party; then, it was about the Iraq war, now, it’s about Wall Street.

But that’s where the similarities end. From the perspective of someone who worked on Obama’s campaign and in his White House, it’s clear that Obama’s race against Clinton is not a useful example. Understanding the dynamics at play in the 2016 primaries requires looking further back at history. And unfortunately for Sanders, history shows that there are only two types of Democratic insurgent candidates: Barack Obama and everyone else.

(more) http://www.vnews.com/home/17856155-95/column-why-bernie-sanders-will-not-be-able-to-pull-off-the-upset

[think]

1. Let them debate!

[DCBob]

2. Good article... here's more..

Obama’s campaign succeeded where everyone else’s failed for two main reasons. His tremendous popularity with African American voters was critical. Although Obama won the black vote by margins as high as 9 to 1 in some states, this was not preordained. Clinton led Obama among African American voters in most polls until after he won Iowa. Obama also found a way to hold his liberal base while simultaneously attracting the enthusiastic support of self-identified independents and moderates. In 2008, he did best in open contests, which allowed anyone to participate regardless of party registration.

===========

Clearly Bernie doesn't and wont ever connect with AA voters and I also doubt he will connect with independents or moderates in any significant way.

The bottom line.. Bernie is no Obama.

[BooScout]

3. Agree.....

I don't think anyone will be able to come even close to what Obama achieved in 2008 for a long, long time.

[DCBob]

5. He was a unique once in a lifetime candidate.

He has also been a great President. I will miss him greatly come Jan 2017.

[FloridaBlues]

7. Agree Bernie is no Obama and won't capture

The variety of voters he needs to become president. One major problem for Bernie to win the primary is women and minority's, will he pull small percentage sure but not enough to pull off the upset.
I will miss our president too😂

[frazzled]

34. Where has he done that for many years?

In Vermont--the 49th state among the 50 in population (only Wyoming has fewer people, and not by much)? The whole state is about the size of Nashville or Oklahoma City, and it's also among the least diverse in the entire nation. So we don't have any evidence one way or another about whether he can pul people all over the political spectrum in, electorally. You can dismiss this as "bashing down" (whatever that means), but it's simply the facts. We don't know how many actual voters he could pull in. It's completely untested on the national stage.

As for becoming more popular through debates, how do we know this? Maybe it might do the opposite. We don't know yet. So far, he's not done very well in venues other than rallies of his supporters. He had issues and/or gaffes at Netroots Nation, the US Hispanic Chamber of Commerce, and the National Urban League conference recently. As for the debates, how do we know he won't come off as rather irrascible and, dare I say, "old" to many voters? I'm not saying those are fair factors or factors that his supporters see as an issue, but they may be factors that a majority of voters see as issues. And that's all that counts.

I think it's a bit misguided always (not just in this case) to assume that if only people would listen to your candidate they would of course be won over instantly (and if not, they can be dismissed as simply "low information" voters or unthinking). Guess what, not everyone thinks like you or me. And it's not because they're stupid or wrong.

[Adrahil]

12. I voted for Obama over Clinton for a number of reasons.....

1) Hillary was too reserved in 2007/8. she needed to be bolder, not nastier.

2) Attacks on Obama.... Thise pissed me off, especially Bill's

3) Obama was magic. I admit it, the man had a way of winning me over to the tips of my toes. On policy, Obama and Clinton weren't that different, but Obama convinced me he would be the better advocate.

4) Hillary had won me over yet. When she became SoS, i was impressed by what she managed in really shitty situation, and her ability to work closely with Obama.

[stone space]

15. This is not quite true. (warnning: pet peeve here)

Clinton led Obama among African American voters in most polls until after he won Iowa.

Those statistics come from looking at polling of AA's in other states whose primaries and caucuses come after Iowa, and ignoring actual caucus results.

But if you look at the statistics from the Iowa Democratic Caucus itself, you'll find that AA's (on January 3, 2008) here in Iowa came out to caucus for Obama overwhelmingly.

For some reason, actual Caucus results from the 2008 Iowa Democratic Caucus itself have been ignored in media accounts when discussing AA support for Obama at the time of the Iowa Caucus.

The line that AA's didn't support Obama until after Iowa derives from the media totally ignoring the votes of AA's in the Iowa Caucus, and using AA's in other states who were not yet fully engaged in the primary process as a standin for AA Iowans who were fully engaged at the time.

But that's comparing apples to oranges, not apples to apples.

By January 3rd, 2008, AA's had already demonstrated overwhelming support for Obama, at least compared with white caucusgoers.

In actual caucus results on the ground, not opinion polls weeks before the caucus. (I don't know of any Iowa opinion polls that separated out and measured AA support for candidates here when Obama was still behind Clinton here in Iowa.)

(Note that while AA's constitute about only about 2.1% of the Iowa population, they actually account for 4% of Iowa caucusgoers.)

2008 IOWA DEMOCRATIC CAUCUS RESULTS:

%.....................Obama.....Edwards....Clinton

93%....White........33%........24%........27%
4%......Black........72%.........8%........16%
3%......Other........49%.........5%.........26%


http://politics.nytimes.com/election-guide/2008/results/vote-polls/IA.html


In other words, it is a claim derived from actively ignoring AA votes in the only actual Caucus that had actually taken place by that time, which strikes me as a very odd way to measure support for a candidate.

[RDANGELO]

4. The Iraq War vote

The main issue that vaulted Obama above Hilliary was the Iraq war vote. I doubt most Democrats right now are even aware of the disparity on that issue, since Bernie is not accentuating that issue. I support Bernie mostly because of the income inequality issue. I think that is true of most of his supporters. Eventually he will move in from his introduction stage, and that's when that issue will take hold, and people will move from Hillary to Bernie.

[pipoman]

27. I think the main thing that vaulted him was not being Hillary...

[tularetom]

6. Every day somebody posts one of these articles

For sure, Senator Sanders is not Obama. But Hillary Clinton isn't Obama either. She's a pretty ordinary politician with no noticeable charisma, empathy or speaking skills. And she has a ton of skeletons rattling around in her closet.

Clinton might be able to buy her way to the Democratic nomination, seeing as how she has apparently already bought off the DNC. But she'll never win a general election, too much baggage and too many contradictions from her WH days, her abbreviated senate term, her 2008 campaign, and her questionable actions as SOS.

Sanders can stand up to the press hatchet job that any Democrat can expect, whereas Clinton cannot.

[FloridaBlues]

9. She has withstood years of Clinton smears and media scrutiny

Where Bernie has not been in same position so it remains to be seen how well he does. HRC knows how to debate we don't know how Bernie will do because never had to on this magnitude
Anyway good article thoughtfully written.

[catnhatnh]

14. What a coincidence......;N/T

[GoneFishin]

8. ... until concrete policy discussions take place. Bring on the debates.

Which is precisely why the debate schedule is being manipulated by the Democratic party leadership.

One candidate is relying on coasting in on name recognition backed by beneficiaries of the status quo, while the other candidate has policy ideas to help average people.

[DCBob]

11. I doubt the debates will have much impact.

Most wont even pay attention since most are have already decided who they are going to vote for. Bernie's only hope is for Hillary to make some huge monumental gaff that goes viral. Im sure Hillary and her people know this and will be extremely cautious in all her comments during the debates. She doesnt need to take any risks... she can coast to victory.

[pipoman]

10. The biggest difference is

One candidate isnt hated by a swath of traditional democratic voters, and most of the vast middle swingers. One candidate isn't promising more of the same. One candidate hasn't been in the pocket of global business for 20 years.

No, this is just more of the inevitable knashing by the establishment party based in fear of the unknown....the general public aren't reluctant to turn this presidency on it's side..

[uponit7771]

19. That swath is the same dem swath that hates Obama, they protest too much

[pipoman]

24. Or they voted for "CHANGE" and received absolutely NONE....

[uponit7771]

26. ...or they were naively expecting FDR when FDR had a 70% PROGRESSIVE congress throughout his

... 4 terms and Obama maybe had a 51% progressive congress for 60 days.

But Obama aint shit to them... and a person who talking about what "should" be done in platitudes and little specifics is the new FDR (and they leave out the fact that Bernie will still be dealing with a gerrymandered republican congress) and this person can throw no stones.

Another reason a good portion of the Obama coalition is ignoring Bernie and this faction of people who complain too much.

[pipoman]

28. Obama doesn't need any kind of Congress to stand with Democrats in opposition to TPP

Instead of championing it....

[uponit7771]

30. So Ten out of 10,000 and Obama still aint shit?!?!? I'm glad Bernie is proud of Obama's record and

... wont choose to run away from it during the primaries.

[pipoman]

31. He ran on "change" then ran from it once in office...

Just more of the same...

[uponit7771]

32. To intimate there's been no change is laughable at best, to intimate Bernie will run away from this

... change is a misunderstanding of the dem electorate (Bernie will cling to Obama and his record) and think Obama could carry out his whole platform with a GOP who opposed him from day one is either not paying a bit of attention or just ODS.

Bernie will be Obama's biggest fan in the next coming weeks

[pipoman]

37. Obama didn't change the things he could

We are still in Iraq and Afghanistan. Same.
We are still imprisoning people at Cuba. Same.
We are still exporting jobs with enhancement of unfair trade deals. Same.
We still don't have a labor party or elected official labor afvocate. Same.
We are still arresting nonviolent drug offenders and the budget has increased to do so. Same
We are still incarcerating more people than any other nation. Same.
There's more....

[uponit7771]

38. Obama didn't change EVERYTHING he could doesn't mean he didn't change anything at all!

... also, Bernie or Hillary or OMalley are never ever going to disappoint on a handful of the 10,000 issues that are on the liberal list?

It think the intimations they wont isn't realistic... they'll disappoint too... there hasn't been a dem candidate or president who hasn't.

None of these guys can throw a stone... including Obama

Question, do you think most if not all of the issues in your last post would be still an issue if Obama had the 70% avg progressive congress FDR had?

tia

[bornskeptic]

40. Obama promised to renogotiate NAFTA and the left cheered.

Then he did it and the left cursed him.
He promised to reform the healthcare system and the left cheered.
He signed a healthcare reform bill almost like he promised, and the left cursed him.
I'm 66 years old. No president in my life has made the kind of effort Obama has to keep his campaign promises.

[elleng]

21. 2 candidates aren't promising more of the same. 2 candidates haven't been in the pocket of

global business for 20 years, and the 2d one is MARTIN O'MALLEY!

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=forum&id=1281

[pipoman]

23. mea culpa

Much as I wish it weren't so, he may not be establishment enough to keep the media from loonifying him...

[elleng]

25. Thanks, pipoman.

GOOD he's not being loonified. However, as long-time mayor and governor, he's pretty establishment; just not advocating to preserve and enhance the DESTRUCTIVE establishment, and THAT position isn't favored by many, it appears. (Astonishes me!)

[Turchinsky]

13. Let them debate: The opinion will be reversed once they see Bernie and Hillary in a debate format.

Sorry, but Hillary is a very poor orator, and that's why DWS is delaying the debates as long as possible.

[elleng]

20. and Martin O'Malley!

Watch THAT!

[restorefreedom]

17. gee, another "bernie cannot possibly win." thread. yawn nt

[uponit7771]

18. "...: In July 2007, Obama had 80 paid staffers working in 25 offices in Iowa..." That's why, Obama's

... ground game was paramount

[cantbeserious]

29. Yet Another Bernie Hit Piece

eom

[Sheepshank]

33. In the last few months there had been a lot of Hillary hit pieces

Invoking the Obama come from behind, is just.like.Bernie. I've tried several times to clarify that Bernie is no Obama and their constituencies ace very different. To no avail. At least I know I wasn't the only one thinking that way.

[Thinkingabout]

35. Let me bring out another point, Hillary grew up in a world where opportunities was not delivered to

Women. We had to fight for every step we took. Obama also had to fight for his gains. On the other hand the other candidates did not have to fight for their status. Don't think for a moment Hillary is going to hand over the nomination to any of them.

For those who thinks Hillary is afraid of the debates, you should put this thought to bed. She was good in 2008 but she is better now.

[Scootaloo]

36. Mr. Pfeiffer's argument is simply "but Obama is special."

And it's fair enough for him to hold that opinion - he worked on that campaign, and there's a definite personal investment in believing "his" campaign was one of a kind.

it does not, however, make him correct. In fact everything he says reinforces the fact that even he knows he's not correct. "Sanders can take Iowa and New Hampshire, but it doesn't matter this time because it just doesn't!" is not a strong counter to the fact that yeah, yeah it DOES matter.

The whole article is Mr. Pfeiffer saying "oh, he totally can. Maybe he will. But he won't!"

[uponit7771]

39. Pfeiffer said Obama had 80 paid staffers in 25 offices in Iowa, that's not just opinion. Sounds like

... Obama had a strong ground game from the beginning.

Anyone know what Sanders ground game after SC looks like?

tia