annoys me. So the downside of enjoying “The Donald” lose to Cruz is that now we have to listen to Cruz gloat. Trump needs to up his trolling game. Calling Cruz a Canadian over the past week was alright, we’ll see what he goes with over the next week. maybe he’ll start calling him Raphael.
But on the Republican side, we got a glimpse of what will happen once the candidates narrow. When it’s down to 2 or 3 how will the votes shake out. Trump’s negatives are through the roof, so looks like there is a path to victory for Cruz or Rubio.
For the Democrats, Sanders gave Clinton a wake up call. She won and she very quickly declared victory to get it in the new cycle the next morning. Sanders will win NH, Clinton will say he’s a regional candidate so we’ll see how people react. I don’t see a path for Sanders, but I like him. Too bad Weaver doesn’t share more of the same traits as Sanders. I’m done with conspiracy theories.
jconwaysays
He won more 18-30 year olds than Obama did, and you better believe the nominee and future Congressional majorities will depend on them showing up. He did significantly better with her than with independents, and nearly ran even with the Latino populations that did vote. Beat her with white working class men which was a demo Obama lost to her. Moreover, his supports showed up in the middle of January to caucus, which is far more difficult and lengthly commitment than just voting, is a testament to the shifting winds of the party.
Clinton would be smart to co-opt Sanders and just level with people straight. It’s the politicking and the pandering primary voters are sick of, most know at the end of the day she is better qualified. Start injecting foreign policy into the debate, not to attack Sanders but just to draw him into a debate he isn’t familiar with having. We are electing a commander in chief, not just a national Senator. I’d be hammering away on that. It’s a debate that has to happen, and if Sanders can step up to it it’ll make him a better nominee too.
johnksays
I think Clinton blunted Sanders momentum in Iowa, Sanders could have won the caucus with more time, it was trending his way. Clinton’s ground game won it for here there. We’ll see if Clinton can narrow the gap in NH, she has done well there in the past.
I agree that Sanders is not a regional candidate based on what he did in Iowa, and I don’t believe he’s doing well in NH because he’s from VT. But that won’t stop Clinton in framing it that way.
So with wins in Nevada and SC prior to Super Tuesday. I’m just wondering how people will react to that framing. I think that’s the way she’s going to frame it. If it goes her way, Sanders could be done on Super Tuesday.
jconwaysays
Her ground game is much better than it was in 2008 and was more prepared for the last minute turnout surge. Mook ended up being the right man for the role because he knew Sanders so well. One of the many reasons a primary is better than a coronation.
jconway says
Right here
johnk says
annoys me. So the downside of enjoying “The Donald” lose to Cruz is that now we have to listen to Cruz gloat. Trump needs to up his trolling game. Calling Cruz a Canadian over the past week was alright, we’ll see what he goes with over the next week. maybe he’ll start calling him Raphael.
But on the Republican side, we got a glimpse of what will happen once the candidates narrow. When it’s down to 2 or 3 how will the votes shake out. Trump’s negatives are through the roof, so looks like there is a path to victory for Cruz or Rubio.
For the Democrats, Sanders gave Clinton a wake up call. She won and she very quickly declared victory to get it in the new cycle the next morning. Sanders will win NH, Clinton will say he’s a regional candidate so we’ll see how people react. I don’t see a path for Sanders, but I like him. Too bad Weaver doesn’t share more of the same traits as Sanders. I’m done with conspiracy theories.
jconway says
He won more 18-30 year olds than Obama did, and you better believe the nominee and future Congressional majorities will depend on them showing up. He did significantly better with her than with independents, and nearly ran even with the Latino populations that did vote. Beat her with white working class men which was a demo Obama lost to her. Moreover, his supports showed up in the middle of January to caucus, which is far more difficult and lengthly commitment than just voting, is a testament to the shifting winds of the party.
Clinton would be smart to co-opt Sanders and just level with people straight. It’s the politicking and the pandering primary voters are sick of, most know at the end of the day she is better qualified. Start injecting foreign policy into the debate, not to attack Sanders but just to draw him into a debate he isn’t familiar with having. We are electing a commander in chief, not just a national Senator. I’d be hammering away on that. It’s a debate that has to happen, and if Sanders can step up to it it’ll make him a better nominee too.
johnk says
I think Clinton blunted Sanders momentum in Iowa, Sanders could have won the caucus with more time, it was trending his way. Clinton’s ground game won it for here there. We’ll see if Clinton can narrow the gap in NH, she has done well there in the past.
I agree that Sanders is not a regional candidate based on what he did in Iowa, and I don’t believe he’s doing well in NH because he’s from VT. But that won’t stop Clinton in framing it that way.
So with wins in Nevada and SC prior to Super Tuesday. I’m just wondering how people will react to that framing. I think that’s the way she’s going to frame it. If it goes her way, Sanders could be done on Super Tuesday.
jconway says
Her ground game is much better than it was in 2008 and was more prepared for the last minute turnout surge. Mook ended up being the right man for the role because he knew Sanders so well. One of the many reasons a primary is better than a coronation.