How should Hillary respond to the Bernie challenge?
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 28, 2024, 02:58:11 PM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Election Archive
  Election Archive
  2016 U.S. Presidential Election
  How should Hillary respond to the Bernie challenge?
« previous next »
Pages: [1] 2
Poll
Question: ?
#1
Go negative on Sanders
 
#2
Move to the left
 
#3
Argue on electability
 
#4
All of the above
 
#5
Other
 
Show Pie Chart
Partisan results

Total Voters: 48

Author Topic: How should Hillary respond to the Bernie challenge?  (Read 1451 times)
Beet
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 28,804


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« on: July 02, 2015, 08:38:47 AM »

With the latest poll out of Iowa, Bernie is starting to do very well. It's possible that he could pull out both Iowa and New Hampshire. At that point, a less-than-stellar performance by Hillary in South Carolina could doom her. Jesse Jackson also won South Carolina in 1988 but that didn't get him the nomination. And blacks won't be as solid for her as they were for Jackson or Obama. Is there any way her multi-million dollar campaign can be saved?
Logged
eric82oslo
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,501
Norway


Political Matrix
E: -6.00, S: -5.65

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1 on: July 02, 2015, 08:50:23 AM »

Move to the left, continue to stress the historic nature of having the first ever female president and argue on electability. She should definitely NOT go negative however, that will only make her look like a sore loser and will have a much more negative impact on her than on Sanders. It will also make the eventual nominee weaker as a result.
Logged
Beet
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 28,804


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2 on: July 02, 2015, 08:53:23 AM »

Move to the left, continue to stress the historic nature of having the first ever female president and argue on electability. She should definitely NOT go negative however, that will only make her look like a sore loser and will have a much more negative impact on her than on Sanders. It will also make the eventual nominee weaker as a result.

People always say you shouldn't go negative. No one likes the idea of "going negative" in the abstract. Just like no one likes raising taxes. But it works. The best moment of her 2008 campaign, besides pulling out New Hampshire, was arguably her Mark Penn-inspired 3 AM ad. Bernie doesn't have to go negative on her because there are already lots of people doing it (including his own supporters). But no one is going negative on Bernie, so she's going to have to do it, even though the blowback will be huge.
Logged
Mr. Morden
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 44,073
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3 on: July 02, 2015, 08:58:20 AM »

She should definitely NOT go negative however, that will only make her look like a sore loser and will have a much more negative impact on her than on Sanders.

That's silly.  Going negative works.  That's why politicians do it all the time.  Now it's true, in a multi-candidate primary, A going negative on B often helps C more than A.  But if Clinton and Sanders are the only candidates in double digits, then there is no C.

That said, it's too early for Clinton to go negative on Sanders.  Iowa is more than 6 months away, and she's still winning everywhere by double digits.  If she keeps leading by double digits, then it's safer not to go negative.  That would just elevate Sanders at this point.

But she should get ready to start cranking out the negative ads in November and December, if it comes to that.  (Alternatively, her Super PAC could do it for her, so she has plausible deniability.)
Logged
eric82oslo
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,501
Norway


Political Matrix
E: -6.00, S: -5.65

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4 on: July 02, 2015, 09:02:40 AM »

There are different ways of going negative. You can disagree strongly on policy issues and show why your opponents positions would be a complete failure and you can be a total ass. Being a total ass would definitely hurt Clinton as much as it would hurt Sanders. Most Democratic voters are highly educated, so they would not tolerate such an attitude from their frontrunner. Maybe they would 20 years ago, when voters in general and Democratic voters in particular, were much less educated.
Logged
King
intermoderate
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 29,357
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #5 on: July 02, 2015, 09:05:09 AM »

If I'm Hillary, I'm more worried about Biden splitting the vote for center-left to moderate Democrats.
Logged
Mr. Morden
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 44,073
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #6 on: July 02, 2015, 09:11:51 AM »

Most Democratic voters are highly educated, so they would not tolerate such an attitude from their frontrunner.

I think you greatly exaggerate the political savviness of the average voter--even the average primary voter.  Most voters don't pay *that* close attention.  Many can be swung by the right ads.  Which, again, don't have to come from Clinton herself, just a pro-Clinton Super PAC that doesn't have her name on it.  They can dump millions of $ of ads in the early primary states that go after Sanders's record.  That kind of thing works.  That's why campaigns do it.
Logged
bedstuy
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,526


Political Matrix
E: -1.16, S: -4.35

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #7 on: July 02, 2015, 09:15:02 AM »

She doesn't need to pay attention to Sanders.  He has a limited appeal and he's not going to win any states besides Vermont.
Logged
Donerail
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 15,345
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #8 on: July 02, 2015, 09:52:20 AM »

Argue electability. You're not going to out-left Bernie, and much of his appeal is being the anti-Clinton anyways. Try to prevent Biden from entering the race, and don't go negative unless there's a real threat.
Logged
Famous Mortimer
WillipsBrighton
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 6,010
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #9 on: July 02, 2015, 10:38:49 AM »

Going negative is fine if the negative things you are saying are true. Sanders doesn't really have any negatives from a Democratic perspective though.
Logged
Mehmentum
Icefire9
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,594
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #10 on: July 02, 2015, 11:02:01 AM »

Outflank him on guns and immigration.  Going negative works, and if she can find an attack that works, she should definitely take advantage of it.  The electability argument is important, emphasize the consequences of loosing this election (a more conservative supreme court could reverse the gay marriage ruling and Roe vs Wade, Obamacare could be repealed, etc.).  All she really needs to do is win the people she won in 2008 + African Americans.  If she can do that, the nomination is her's. 
Logged
Pandaguineapig
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,608
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #11 on: July 02, 2015, 11:17:44 AM »

Going Left just hurts her in the general I think if you ignore him the fad will just die out like Ron Paul and Howard Dean
Logged
bobloblaw
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,018
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #12 on: July 02, 2015, 11:42:48 AM »

Going Left just hurts her in the general I think if you ignore him the fad will just die out like Ron Paul and Howard Dean
She'll go further left and assume the national electorate is further to the left also versus 2012 and the GOP will move further to the right
Logged
🦀🎂🦀🎂
CrabCake
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 19,192
Kiribati


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #13 on: July 02, 2015, 12:03:41 PM »

Kill him with kindness. Reframe his big issues with your own proposals. Never condemn him though.

* Mehmentum, guns are a bad issue for Democrats. Gun control proposals, even modest ones, seem to be underwater with public.
Logged
Gallium
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 270
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #14 on: July 02, 2015, 12:23:37 PM »

Keep on keepin' on.

Roll out a comprehensive set of policy proposals this summer as planned, many of which address leftist concerns. Destroy him in the debates by contrasting her detailed plan of action with Sanders' empty bluster. Double down on organization in the early states that will ultimately help her win by large margins.
Logged
Blue3
Starwatcher
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 12,035
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #15 on: July 02, 2015, 12:29:36 PM »

Hillary has already emphasized her left-of-center positions this time. She just needs to emphasize them, and show how she would have a better chance of actually implementing them than her opponents.
Logged
xavier110
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,511
United States
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #16 on: July 02, 2015, 12:31:26 PM »

It's difficult to say what she can do when so much of the problem is her actual biography and personality -- you can't really roll back the Clinton years, her being cozy with Wall Street, her smarmy personality, etc.

That's what comes with being a well-known figure for decades. She's lucky that she has the machine support in her pocket. Unfortunately for her, the educated, white liberals in the early states aren't machine voters.
Logged
Beet
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 28,804


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #17 on: July 02, 2015, 12:40:16 PM »

Going negative is fine if the negative things you are saying are true. Sanders doesn't really have any negatives from a Democratic perspective though.

Everyone has negatives. Bernie has taken some pretty extreme positions on gun control, voting against the Brady Bill in 1993 and voting to support gun manufacturers' special immunity from lawsuits. He also voted against immigration reform in 2007. He's never represented a diverse constituency, and he'll be 75 years old in 2016. Then there's the fact that he's never led in a national poll.
Logged
°Leprechaun
tmcusa2
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,116
Uruguay


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #18 on: July 02, 2015, 12:46:50 PM »

I voted other.

I do think that Sanders could win in New Hampshire. If he does, that could help him in other states. Whether he wins New Hampshire depends obviously on Iowa.

Clinton could do what Reagan did in 1976 and announce her VP choice early, albeit an unlikely gambit.
Logged
°Leprechaun
tmcusa2
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,116
Uruguay


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #19 on: July 02, 2015, 12:53:38 PM »

Is Sander's age an issue? Reagan was 69 in 1980 and 74 in 1984 and lived to be 93.
Admittedly it could be an issue, but it didn't hurt Reagan, not much. Moreover, many people thought that Reagan was too conservative to be electable. Likewise arguing that Sanders is too liberal may end up being a mistake. I am not aware of any polls that show how he would do in the general election. Are there any?
Logged
publicunofficial
angryGreatness
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,010
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #20 on: July 02, 2015, 01:02:42 PM »

Kill him with kindness. Reframe his big issues with your own proposals. Never condemn him.

This. Assauge progressives with some lofty proposals, probably continue her trend of stealing Elizabeth Warren talking points, and Bernie's support will either fade or cease to grow.

The worst thing she could do is go onto the debate stage and call him a crazy communist.
Logged
publicunofficial
angryGreatness
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,010
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #21 on: July 02, 2015, 01:05:41 PM »

Is Sander's age an issue? Reagan was 69 in 1980 and 74 in 1984 and lived to be 93.
Admittedly it could be an issue, but it didn't hurt Reagan, not much. Moreover, many people thought that Reagan was too conservative to be electable. Likewise arguing that Sanders is too liberal may end up being a mistake. I am not aware of any polls that show how he would do in the general election. Are there any?

Reagan's age may have well been a problem; there's a very good chance that Reagan began suffering from dementia towards the end of his presidency, and was diagnosed with Alzheimer's not long after leaving office.
Logged
RR1997
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,997
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #22 on: July 02, 2015, 01:06:56 PM »

She doesn't need to pay attention to Sanders.  He has a limited appeal and he's not going to win any states besides Vermont.
^
This

[/thread]
Logged
eric82oslo
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,501
Norway


Political Matrix
E: -6.00, S: -5.65

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #23 on: July 02, 2015, 01:12:32 PM »

Is Sander's age an issue? Reagan was 69 in 1980 and 74 in 1984 and lived to be 93.
Admittedly it could be an issue, but it didn't hurt Reagan, not much. Moreover, many people thought that Reagan was too conservative to be electable. Likewise arguing that Sanders is too liberal may end up being a mistake. I am not aware of any polls that show how he would do in the general election. Are there any?

Reagan's age may have well been a problem; there's a very good chance that Reagan began suffering from dementia towards the end of his presidency, and was diagnosed with Alzheimer's not long after leaving office.

This. You said what I was gonna say. Smiley
Logged
Mehmentum
Icefire9
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,594
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #24 on: July 02, 2015, 01:12:50 PM »

Is Sander's age an issue? Reagan was 69 in 1980 and 74 in 1984 and lived to be 93.
Admittedly it could be an issue, but it didn't hurt Reagan, not much. Moreover, many people thought that Reagan was too conservative to be electable. Likewise arguing that Sanders is too liberal may end up being a mistake. I am not aware of any polls that show how he would do in the general election. Are there any?
Sanders isn't that much older than Clinton, so while age might be an issue Clinton isn't in the best position to take advantage of it.

The problem with general election polls this far out is that a lot of candidates have very low name recognition.  Polls with Bernie Sanders tend to have him sitting at like 36% with the Republican at around 40% because a lot of people have no idea who Sanders is.
Logged
Pages: [1] 2  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.052 seconds with 15 queries.