538: Jim Webb (or similar moderate) better anti-Hillary than liberal one

[JRP1994]

http://fivethirtyeight.com/datalab/casting-the-ideal-challenger-to-hillary-clinton/

"Jim Webb, the former Democratic senator from Virginia, stirred the political pot this past week, saying he was considering a presidential run in 2016. Webb was a moderate when he was in the Senate, and he strikes a different ideological chord than other potential contenders that have been put forward as alternatives to Hillary Clinton, such as liberal stalwarts Howard Dean and Elizabeth Warren.

Put it all together, and you start to get a picture of what a Clinton challenger might look like: probably male, moderate and anti-establishment.

Who matches that profile?

Webb, for one. He has been both a Democrat and Republican. Maybe Brian Schweitzer, the former Montana governor who mixes liberal and conservative positions and is not a fan of the Washington, D.C., establishment. A candidate like Joe Biden, who has been in Washington for over 40 years – probably not."

[7,052,770]

That makes sense. I expect the liberal base to rally around Hillary because why risk a sure bet with strong coattails?

[Blue3]

How could someone like Jim Webb win any of the Democratic primaries?

[Bull Moose Base]

That's Nate Silver's website but Harry Enten's piece. Also, yeah, Schweizter seems better positioned since he can appeal simultaneously to Democrats who think Clinton is too liberal and those who think she's too conservative. But hard to imagine him getting past his gun issues.

[daveosupremo]

How could someone like Jim Webb win any of the Democratic primaries?

He could potentially do pretty well in open primary states if Rand is the presumptive GOP nominee.

[Lief 🗽]

Was Webb really that conservative? I remember he was pro-gun, but he seemed pretty left-wing/populist on economic issues. He was also pretty anti-Iraq War and wrote that prison reform act.

[daveosupremo]

He was a pretty line voter when he was in the Senate, but his writings and political endorsements are more conservative. He would be able to paint with a broad brush and appeal to a large number of voters. Progressive college kids will vote for him because of social issues and neocon Republicans will vote for him over Rand if they place their hawkish ideology over domestic policy.

[Donerail]

and neocon Republicans will vote for him over Rand if they place their hawkish ideology over domestic policy.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Webb's no neocon.

[daveosupremo]

and neocon Republicans will vote for him over Rand if they place their hawkish ideology over domestic policy.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Webb's no neocon.

No, he's not. But he is much closer ideologically on foreign policy to the John McCain wing of the Republican party than Rand Paul is.

[Mr. Morden]

Edwards of course tended to attract more moderate voters than either Clinton or Obama in 2008, despite being to the left of them on most issues.  I suspect you'd see a similar phenomenon with a hypothetical Schweitzer or Webb challenge to Clinton.  Doesn't matter if their actual positions on issues are to the left or right of Clinton.  Because they're seen as more "culturally conservative", they'd attract more of that type of voter.

[Mister Mets]

How could someone like Jim Webb win any of the Democratic primaries?

I think Webb, Schweitzer or whoever would be a major underdog, but there are a few strategies to help.

1. Spend a lot of time in the early states. Shake the hand of every primary voter. Break records for town halls. Make Hillary Clinton look weak and tired. This is doable for anyone who isn't in elected office.

2. Make trust an issue. Hillary Clinton is not the candidate who can say "You may not always agree with me, but you can always trust me to tell you the truth."

3. Find primary fault lines and get to the side younger Democrats are on. Hillary Clinton has a lot of wall street ties, and what was socially acceptable for a southern first lady in the 1980s may not be preferable for democratic primary voters now.

4. Look at what McCain 2000 and Obama 2008 did to excite new voters.

5. Laser-focus on a few issues that offer the best contrast with Hillary Clinton, especially if there's a position she took due to political convenience.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Just because it's on 538 doesn't mean that it's not total bullsh**t.

[Napoleon]

Was Webb really that conservative? I remember he was pro-gun, but he seemed pretty left-wing/populist on economic issues. He was also pretty anti-Iraq War and wrote that prison reform act.

Webb was one of my favorite Senators and no, he wasn't really conservative on anything, even guns. I think he more talked the Virginia talk on that issue if anything. I'd be willing to consider him over Hillary.

[Joe Biden 2020]

As has been mentioned, Sen. Webb was not really conservative.  I always thought of him as a liberal.  That said, I can't see him doing much in 2016.  He's been out of politics too long and he's not a nationally known candidate.

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

Obviously Webb is not a conservative, but he has this "tough" image.

[IceSpear]

That makes sense. I expect the liberal base to rally around Hillary because why risk a sure bet with strong coattails?

The liberal base already has rallied around Hillary.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

So Webb would be the anti-Hillary, but not Biden or Sanders. 538 is officially a joke site.

[/]

Political analysts (538, Sabato, 538, Sabato, 538, Sabato, Sabato, etc.) are annoyingly anti-Sanders.

[Figueira]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

So Webb would be the anti-Hillary, but not Biden or Sanders. 538 is officially a joke site.

Well I don't think anyone expected Biden to run against Hillary at that point.

But yeah, people in general tend to underestimate more "extreme" members of parties, at least in their ability to get some support.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

So Webb would be the anti-Hillary, but not Biden or Sanders. 538 is officially a joke site.

Well I don't think anyone expected Biden to run against Hillary at that point.

But yeah, people in general tend to underestimate more "extreme" members of parties, at least in their ability to get some support.

Well, Biden hasn't decided to run yet. But the fact that Sanders + Biden > Hillary + Webb in the polls is an epic fail for 538.

[Donald Trump 2016 !]

538 seems to do everything it can to minimize Sanders' chances of becoming the nominee. Same with Trump.

[Crumpets]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

So Webb would be the anti-Hillary, but not Biden or Sanders. 538 is officially a joke site.

Well I don't think anyone expected Biden to run against Hillary at that point.

But yeah, people in general tend to underestimate more "extreme" members of parties, at least in their ability to get some support.

Well, Biden has decided to run yet. But the fact that Sanders + Biden > Hillary + Webb in the polls is an epic fail for 538.

I don't get why you keep bringing this point up. What is it supposed to prove? Sanders and Biden represent completely different wings of the party, and if Biden runs, it's not like Hillary winning a plurality instead of a majority will change much at all about how the race develops. If Biden doesn't run, Sanders may get a couple of his supporters, but polls have shown Hillary will get more. The only numbers that matter are that Hillary > Biden and Hillary > Sanders. Unless one of these two changes, she will be the nominee.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

So Webb would be the anti-Hillary, but not Biden or Sanders. 538 is officially a joke site.

Well I don't think anyone expected Biden to run against Hillary at that point.

But yeah, people in general tend to underestimate more "extreme" members of parties, at least in their ability to get some support.

Well, Biden has decided to run yet. But the fact that Sanders + Biden > Hillary + Webb in the polls is an epic fail for 538.

I don't get why you keep bringing this point up. What is it supposed to prove? Sanders and Biden represent completely different wings of the party, and if Biden runs, it's not like Hillary winning a plurality instead of a majority will change much at all about how the race develops. If Biden doesn't run, Sanders may get a couple of his supporters, but polls have shown Hillary will get more. The only numbers that matter are that Hillary > Biden and Hillary > Sanders. Unless one of these two changes, she will be the nominee.

I wouldn't be too sure about her being the nominee. But even if she's the eventual nominee, the fact that Biden and Sanders have more than Hillary and Webb combined is some massive fail for 538.

[Eraserhead]

Haha what an idiot!

[🦀🎂🦀🎂]

Political analysts (538, Sabato, 538, Sabato, 538, Sabato, Sabato, etc.) are annoyingly anti-Sanders.

Only in the sense that weather forecasters are pro-rain.