It's obvious which primary is more interesting but the media is determined to bring intrigue to the Democrats by claiming that Hillary is in big trouble because
1. One poll out of hundreds has shown her behind somewhere-NH; which is where Bernie has the best shot as it's close to him in Vermont and full of the white liberals who really dig him.
2. Because she used private email and a server, a server. I mean that's so different than what anyone else does other than Jeb and most other major GOP candidates. I know she was Secretary of State which makes the whole thing different just like the fact that every GOPer in Congress who told Clinton to resign were also serial adulterers didn't matter because they weren't the President and he was.
As FiveThirtyEight points out, her numbers are about where you'd expect them to be with or without emailgate.
http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/hillary-clinton-scandal-inevitable-problems/
On Friday the media was frenzy mode about Biden running for President-even though he it talking about just one term-what good is that? Then the Dems' don't even get the advantage of incumbency in 2020.
Turns out though few in the Obama administration-and Biden has lots of friends here-are behind a Biden candidacy.
But to demonstrate just how much the media grasps at straws Waldman puts it well here:
"First there was the fevered speculation about Vice President Biden running against her, based on second-hand reports that Biden has had conversations about the possibility of running. I’m sure that Biden thinks about being president about as often as he brushes his teeth, but that doesn’t mean there’s an actual candidacy in the offing. But it isn’t just him. ABC News reports that “a one-time high-ranking political adviser to Al Gore tells ABC News that a group of friends and former aides are having a ‘soft conversation’ about the possibility that Gore run for president in 2016.” Gore himself is not interested, but who cares? People keep asking John Kerry if he’s going to jump into the race, no matter how many times he says no. Time magazinesays Democrats are headed for a repeat of the 1968 election, with Clinton cast as Lyndon Johnson and her email controversy offered as a parallel to the Vietnam War (pretty much the same magnitude, right?)."
https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/wp/2015/08/17/no-hillary-clinton-is-not-spiraling-downward/
If you want documentation of how much the media is exaggerating emails just look at this comparison to Vietnam. As if this is about anything but political gotcha games.
As for Bernie, the dirty little secret is that he's the scion of white liberals but the Democratic electorate is made up of a lot beyond white liberals.
"In Sanders, Clinton has drawn an opponent who is relatively well suited to New Hampshire and Iowa. The reason is simple: Sanders’s support comes mostly from white liberals, and the Democratic electorates in New Hampshire and Iowa have lots of white liberals. Furthermore, Iowa and New Hampshire are small states, which makes it easier for candidates who don’t have Clinton’s financial resources to compete there. But we’ve seen this movie before. Based on current polling averages, Sanders would almost exactly replicate Bradley’s performance in 2000, losing Iowa by double digits, giving Clinton a close call in New Hampshire, then losing badly once the calendar turned to more populous and diverse states."
http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/hillary-clinton-scandal-inevitable-problems/
"The Sanders surge has slowed over the last month. Yes, a poll out of New Hampshire has him leading Mrs. Clinton. But Iowa and New Hampshire were always going to be his strong spots — just as liberal havens like Seattle and Boulder, Colo., are favorable terrain."
"A closer look at the polls shows that he is simply not within striking distance of winning the nomination. His support has run into a wall: Women, blacks and Hispanics continue to support Mrs. Clinton by a wide margin, as do white moderate and conservative Democrats."
"Mr. Sanders has become the favorite of one of the Democratic Party’s most important factions: the overwhelmingly white, progressive left. These voters are plentiful in the well-educated, more secular enclaves where journalists roam. This voting support is enough for him to compete in Iowa; New Hampshire and elsewhere in New England; the Northwest; and many Western caucuses. But it is not a viable electoral coalition in a Democratic Party that is far more moderate and diverse than his supporters seem to recognize."
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/08/16/upshot/is-hillary-clinton-really-in-danger-of-losing-the-primary.html?ref=politics&_r=1&abt=0002&abg=0
1. One poll out of hundreds has shown her behind somewhere-NH; which is where Bernie has the best shot as it's close to him in Vermont and full of the white liberals who really dig him.
2. Because she used private email and a server, a server. I mean that's so different than what anyone else does other than Jeb and most other major GOP candidates. I know she was Secretary of State which makes the whole thing different just like the fact that every GOPer in Congress who told Clinton to resign were also serial adulterers didn't matter because they weren't the President and he was.
As FiveThirtyEight points out, her numbers are about where you'd expect them to be with or without emailgate.
http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/hillary-clinton-scandal-inevitable-problems/
On Friday the media was frenzy mode about Biden running for President-even though he it talking about just one term-what good is that? Then the Dems' don't even get the advantage of incumbency in 2020.
Turns out though few in the Obama administration-and Biden has lots of friends here-are behind a Biden candidacy.
But to demonstrate just how much the media grasps at straws Waldman puts it well here:
"First there was the fevered speculation about Vice President Biden running against her, based on second-hand reports that Biden has had conversations about the possibility of running. I’m sure that Biden thinks about being president about as often as he brushes his teeth, but that doesn’t mean there’s an actual candidacy in the offing. But it isn’t just him. ABC News reports that “a one-time high-ranking political adviser to Al Gore tells ABC News that a group of friends and former aides are having a ‘soft conversation’ about the possibility that Gore run for president in 2016.” Gore himself is not interested, but who cares? People keep asking John Kerry if he’s going to jump into the race, no matter how many times he says no. Time magazinesays Democrats are headed for a repeat of the 1968 election, with Clinton cast as Lyndon Johnson and her email controversy offered as a parallel to the Vietnam War (pretty much the same magnitude, right?)."
https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/wp/2015/08/17/no-hillary-clinton-is-not-spiraling-downward/
If you want documentation of how much the media is exaggerating emails just look at this comparison to Vietnam. As if this is about anything but political gotcha games.
As for Bernie, the dirty little secret is that he's the scion of white liberals but the Democratic electorate is made up of a lot beyond white liberals.
"In Sanders, Clinton has drawn an opponent who is relatively well suited to New Hampshire and Iowa. The reason is simple: Sanders’s support comes mostly from white liberals, and the Democratic electorates in New Hampshire and Iowa have lots of white liberals. Furthermore, Iowa and New Hampshire are small states, which makes it easier for candidates who don’t have Clinton’s financial resources to compete there. But we’ve seen this movie before. Based on current polling averages, Sanders would almost exactly replicate Bradley’s performance in 2000, losing Iowa by double digits, giving Clinton a close call in New Hampshire, then losing badly once the calendar turned to more populous and diverse states."
http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/hillary-clinton-scandal-inevitable-problems/
"The Sanders surge has slowed over the last month. Yes, a poll out of New Hampshire has him leading Mrs. Clinton. But Iowa and New Hampshire were always going to be his strong spots — just as liberal havens like Seattle and Boulder, Colo., are favorable terrain."
"A closer look at the polls shows that he is simply not within striking distance of winning the nomination. His support has run into a wall: Women, blacks and Hispanics continue to support Mrs. Clinton by a wide margin, as do white moderate and conservative Democrats."
"Mr. Sanders has become the favorite of one of the Democratic Party’s most important factions: the overwhelmingly white, progressive left. These voters are plentiful in the well-educated, more secular enclaves where journalists roam. This voting support is enough for him to compete in Iowa; New Hampshire and elsewhere in New England; the Northwest; and many Western caucuses. But it is not a viable electoral coalition in a Democratic Party that is far more moderate and diverse than his supporters seem to recognize."
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/08/16/upshot/is-hillary-clinton-really-in-danger-of-losing-the-primary.html?ref=politics&_r=1&abt=0002&abg=0
No in my experience firebaggers never recognize that there is anyone who doesn't agree with them on anything.
No comments:
Post a Comment