Nate Silver: Hillary does not have a problem on her left

[JRP1994]

http://fivethirtyeight.com/datalab/hillary-clinton-doesnt-have-a-problem-on-her-left/

"None of this is to say that Clinton should blithely dismiss criticism from liberals. It could make it more likely that some credentialed candidate to her left also runs for the Democratic nomination. That could have negative consequences for Clinton even if the challenge is unlikely to succeed. But for Clinton to lose the Democratic nomination for ideological reasons would require a pronounced leftward shift in the party — something close to an ideological realignment — and not incremental change over the next two years."

[BlueSwan]

I agree. She doesn't.

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

There will be lots of noises from the left if she's running - but the reality is, there really isn't a nationally viable candidate from the left - this is not 2008 and the mood will likely not suit an Obama-like insurgent/grass-roots candidate.

[Mister Mets]

She's unlikely to lose for purely ideological reasons.

But a combination of a weak campaign and unforced errors could leave her vulnerable to a challenger from the left.

[Eraserhead]

I'm only registered as a Democrat so I can vote in the primaries at this point anyway.

[IceSpear]

Evidence that Hillary doesn't have a problem on her left:
- Every poll in the last 2 years

Evidence that Hillary does have a problem on her left:
- Pundit opinion pieces
- Gut feelings
- Daily Kos comment threads

Hmm...I wonder which Nate Silver will go with?

[IceSpear]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Maybe now that Nate Silver is staying it instead of me, people will pay attention.

[free my dawg]

She has a problem with the left. Luckily for her the left is split to all hell (I'd like to see everyone get behind Sanders or Schweitzer myself), and the last progressive upstart is totally behind her.

[Bull Moose Base]

She has a problem with the left. Luckily for her the left is split to all hell (I'd like to see everyone get behind Sanders or Schweitzer myself), and the last progressive upstart is totally behind her.

Warren isn't totally behind Clinton. If she doesn't run herself, I doubt she'd endorse Hillary in a primary against Sanders. (Most likely she wouldn't endorse at all.) If Hillary's the nominee, obviously Warren will endorse or campaign for her.

[SWE]

Warren already endorsed Hillary

[Bull Moose Base]

Warren accepted a request to sign an ostensibly private letter to Hillary encouraging her to run. That's not an endorsement really. Warren probably guessed it was likely to leak to the public but if anything that diminishes it since it's a good bet she just didn't want to invite a media frenzy. (Same with Klobuchar) When asked about Hillary, Warren is generally positive (as is Bernie Sanders) but largely dodges. I'd find Warren endorsing Hillary in a primary more surprising than Warren running herself.

[tarheel-leftist85]

Lol, there is no left of the Democratic Party. When any of them call for a permanent WPA, then i'll believe there is a left.

[The Mikado]

Yeah, there's no left credible left challenge to Clinton because there's no figure with the stature to become a voice for that challenge.

[Hamster]

Yeah, there's no left credible left challenge to Clinton because there's no figure with the stature to become a voice for that challenge.

It all depends on the national mood. It's hard to say where we will be in a year and a half, but putting boots on the ground in Iraq is a real possible. If the conditions are right, even Bernie Sanders could mount a serious challenge from the left.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

I don't think you can tell for sure just from historical polling. Iowa is still aways away.

Also, many are thinking that Paul may be a huge problem for Hillary in the general, since he'll run to her left on some issues, and cost her a lot of traditional Democratic votes.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2014/08/14/1321633/-While-Hillary-is-Busy-Reaffirming-Her-Neocon-Chops-Rand-Paul-Siezes-the-Populist-Beachhead

[HAnnA MArin County]

I don't think you can tell for sure just from historical polling. Iowa is still aways away.

Also, many a fringe minority on the left are thinking that Paul may be a huge problem for Hillary in the general, since he'll run to her left on some issues, and cost her a lot of traditional Democratic votes.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2014/08/14/1321633/-While-Hillary-is-Busy-Reaffirming-Her-Neocon-Chops-Rand-Paul-Siezes-the-Populist-Beachhead

And in doing so, it will cost him a lot of traditional Republican votes as well.

Ayn Rand Paul will split the Republican Party, thus enabling an easy Hillary victory.

[dmmidmi]

I don't think you can tell for sure just from historical polling. Iowa is still aways away.

Also, many are thinking that Paul may be a huge problem for Hillary in the general, since he'll run to her left on some issues, and cost her a lot of traditional Democratic votes.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2014/08/14/1321633/-While-Hillary-is-Busy-Reaffirming-Her-Neocon-Chops-Rand-Paul-Siezes-the-Populist-Beachhead

"Traditionally Democratic" voters will abandon Bill's wife for Rand Paul, because of some minor political posturing? Color me skeptical.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

I don't think you can tell for sure just from historical polling. Iowa is still aways away.

Also, many are thinking that Paul may be a huge problem for Hillary in the general, since he'll run to her left on some issues, and cost her a lot of traditional Democratic votes.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2014/08/14/1321633/-While-Hillary-is-Busy-Reaffirming-Her-Neocon-Chops-Rand-Paul-Siezes-the-Populist-Beachhead

"Traditionally Democratic" voters will abandon Bill's wife for Rand Paul, because of some minor political posturing? Color me skeptical.

This isn't posturing. Hillary is awful on plenty of issues.

[IceSpear]

Yeah, there's no left credible left challenge to Clinton because there's no figure with the stature to become a voice for that challenge.

It all depends on the national mood. It's hard to say where we will be in a year and a half, but putting boots on the ground in Iraq is a real possible. If the conditions are right, even Bernie Sanders could mount a serious challenge from the left.

Ignoring all of Silver's factual arguments by responding with a vacuous "anything can happen in a year!" or a "a week is an eternity in politics!" is just the worst. Hillary got nearly half the vote and only barely lost even in a perfect storm against her, and she's in a much stronger position now than she was then.

[IceSpear]

I don't think you can tell for sure just from historical polling. Iowa is still aways away.

Also, many are thinking that Paul may be a huge problem for Hillary in the general, since he'll run to her left on some issues, and cost her a lot of traditional Democratic votes.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2014/08/14/1321633/-While-Hillary-is-Busy-Reaffirming-Her-Neocon-Chops-Rand-Paul-Siezes-the-Populist-Beachhead

"Traditionally Democratic" voters will abandon Bill's wife for Rand Paul, because of some minor political posturing? Color me skeptical.

Yeah, the young white libertarian men that are in love with Rand aren't exactly representative of the Democratic Party base.

[The Ex-Factor]

If anything, those people are wildly overrepresented on the Internet though, so look forward to a lot of that angle if it is a Paul - Clinton general election matchup.

[Mr. Morden]

Of course she doesn't have enough detractors on the left to cost her the nomination.  However, recent polls show that of the few Democrats who are dissatisfied with her, more come from her right than her left, and I doubt that'll last forever.  If she gets a primary challenge from Bernie Sanders or someone in that vein, then many people who are currently tuned out of the day to day political back and forth will be exposed to some of the left-wing arguments against her that few are paying attention to just yet.

Of course, it won't be enough to cost her the nomination.  But surely there will be at least *some* liberal anxiety about her that will get dredged up by a primary challenge.

[nolesfan2011]

She's unlikely to lose for purely ideological reasons.

But a combination of a weak campaign and unforced errors could leave her vulnerable to a challenger from the left.

she may not have a problem in the polls now but mark my words she will

[dmmidmi]

I don't think you can tell for sure just from historical polling. Iowa is still aways away.

Also, many are thinking that Paul may be a huge problem for Hillary in the general, since he'll run to her left on some issues, and cost her a lot of traditional Democratic votes.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2014/08/14/1321633/-While-Hillary-is-Busy-Reaffirming-Her-Neocon-Chops-Rand-Paul-Siezes-the-Populist-Beachhead

"Traditionally Democratic" voters will abandon Bill's wife for Rand Paul, because of some minor political posturing? Color me skeptical.

This isn't posturing. Hillary is awful on plenty of issues.

Your original comment implies that people who vote reliably Democratic will vote for Rand Paul over Hillary Clinton for any reason. This is ridiculous.