Do AZ/FL & Wisc/Mich have an inverse relationship regarding Trade, etc...

[Rjjr77]

There's no sizable pro-free trade bloc in the Florida electorate. Not sure what demographic you're suggesting exists that would vote like that. In a lot of Rust Belt states, it's easy to point out which folks are voting against free trade, because the impacts of free trade are tangible (this factory shut down, that kinda thing). There's no opposite effect of similar magnitude in Florida, or anywhere else for that matter.

As for Julian Castro, he would have done nothing to win Florida. Given his last name, he may have hurt the ticket. If it's Luis Gutiérrez then maybe you get enough of an effect on turnout in the Orlando burbs to swing the state, but that's unlikely. There's not really any other nationally prominent Cuban or Puerto Rican Democrats (even Gutiérrez is a stretch).

You're right. But trade was never a General Election issue, she would've won on the mere fact if someone like Warren or Bernie with the VP that the progressive part had a say. The younger vote 18-30 would've turned out, especially for Bernie but Warren was a good substitute because she was so Anti-Wall Street. The reason Bernie did so well because he talked about how the Elite has flushed so much money into campaigns because of Citizens Untied, we all saw the corruption but a lot of us didn't vote just "complained". It's sad but now we have Trump and it was an "Oh, sh**t!" wake up call. Trump is Mr. Wall-Street, he's never talked bad about them, he talked trade and how outsourcing stole all the jobs while it was actually Wall-Street manipulating their investments in companies that didn't send jobs overseas to make numbers lower. It's a pyramid scheme if you want to get to semantics. I've always thought that Wall-Street is just legalized gambling over business, their needs to be tighter regulations. Bernie raises so much money without a corporate handout it's baffling.

Bernie yes, but there is nothing to suggest the youth vote would have turned out for Warren. A large chunk of sanders youth support was more about outsider appeal than actual policy. The progressive wing definitely exists, but if you think progressives not turning out was Hillary's biggest problem you're wrong.

[Rjjr77]

There's no sizable pro-free trade bloc in the Florida electorate. Not sure what demographic you're suggesting exists that would vote like that. In a lot of Rust Belt states, it's easy to point out which folks are voting against free trade, because the impacts of free trade are tangible (this factory shut down, that kinda thing). There's no opposite effect of similar magnitude in Florida, or anywhere else for that matter.

As for Julian Castro, he would have done nothing to win Florida. Given his last name, he may have hurt the ticket. If it's Luis Gutiérrez then maybe you get enough of an effect on turnout in the Orlando burbs to swing the state, but that's unlikely. There's not really any other nationally prominent Cuban or Puerto Rican Democrats (even Gutiérrez is a stretch).

You're right. But trade was never a General Election issue, she would've won on the mere fact if someone like Warren or Bernie with the VP that the progressive part had a say. The younger vote 18-30 would've turned out, especially for Bernie but Warren was a good substitute because she was so Anti-Wall Street. The reason Bernie did so well because he talked about how the Elite has flushed so much money into campaigns because of Citizens Untied, we all saw the corruption but a lot of us didn't vote just "complained". It's sad but now we have Trump and it was an "Oh, sh**t!" wake up call. Trump is Mr. Wall-Street, he's never talked bad about them, he talked trade and how outsourcing stole all the jobs while it was actually Wall-Street manipulating their investments in companies that didn't send jobs overseas to make numbers lower. It's a pyramid scheme if you want to get to semantics. I've always thought that Wall-Street is just legalized gambling over business, their needs to be tighter regulations. Bernie raises so much money without a corporate handout it's baffling.

Bernie yes, but there is nothing to suggest the youth vote would have turned out for Warren. A large chunk of sanders youth support was more about outsider appeal than actual policy. The progressive wing definitely exists, but if you think progressives not turning out was Hillary's biggest problem you're wrong.

I worked with my Union out in Nevada for Clinton and I can tell you, it's true. If she didn't pick Bernie, Warren was the next best bet. Kaine was ultimately uninspiring and Biden made the VP a much more important choice because of how he helped Obama govern. A big part of the Bernie-wing was being Anti-Wall Street. We were all involved that housing-bubble crash and she was a champion against them. She would've never hurt her chances, Trump/Pence could've still won but we'll never know. Hillary was never a good politician, she lost to Barack in '08 and almost lost to Bernie, she should've known and her team that Trump was formidable.

I just can't disagree more. Progressives didn't lose Hillary the election, white Union moderate democrats did. There were plenty of mistakes along the way, but her biggest was ignoring Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania until the end, and that had nothing to do with progressives, just seeing how Ohio was looking solidly in trumps camp the entire election, she should have been way more worried about the industrial Midwest.

I agree she isn't a great politician, never was, but her and her staff were killed by hubris not defecting progressives.