Discussion about this post

User's avatar
DemoCat 🐈🌊⚖️'s avatar

Trump had all that power and an unfair corrupt advantage and couldn’t pass any meaningful infrastructure package or rework national healthcare. Biden, on the other hand, almost immediately addressed infrastructure, and would have helped millions more with much broader programs, were it not for Manchin and Sinema. Those aren’t remotely two sides of the same coin.

Expand full comment
marshwren's avatar

If you're going to cite sources, try providing links. It's kind of hard to argue against imaginary data. That said, the ability of the DNC to pick their preferred candidate and paving the path to the nomination for them doesn't mean that candidate will be the "best" candidate available in general election. As the following charts clearly demonstrate.

https://www.realclearpoliti...

https://www.realclearpoliti...

If you just looked at these electoral college maps without knowing who the candidates were, which one would appear to be the stronger candidate? And if that doesn't give you pause, it gets exponentially worse for Clinton at the state-by-state level. Clinton and Sanders had six states in common as toss-ups (excluding NM b/c there's no data for Sanders; and CO b/c the only Sanders poll was from 11/2015):

AZ: Clinton -4% (lost by 3.5%); Sanders - +8.3%FL: Clinton -.2% (lost by 1.2%); Sanders - +3.2%NC: Clinton -1% (lost by 3.7%); Sanders - +7.5%OH: Clinton -3.5% (lost by 8.1); Sanders - +5

And it gets worse yet: Two states rated as toss ups for Clinton (MI: +3.4%, lost by ,3%; Sanders +19%; and PA: Clinton +1.9% ,lost by .7%; Sanders +12.7%) were rated as leaning towards Sanders. And the icing on the cake is three states rated as solid for Trump (against Clinton) being rated as toss ups for Sanders (IN -1%; IA +9%, and MO +3%). It's also worth noting that WI, rated as leaning for both Hillary and Sanders, was Clinton - +6.5% (and lost by .7%) and Sanders - +19%.

In the interest of intellectual honesty, I crunched the numbers for 2020 again and must correct a mistake: Biden came within three states (AZ, GA, WI and ME-2*) electoral, and 72,825 popular, votes of losing.

*38 additional electoral votes that would have given Trump a 270 to 268 Electoral College win. In fact, Biden could have won ME-2, resulting in a 269 EC tie, that Trump would have won in the House (on the basis of each state getting one vote, regardless of size, due to controlling a majority, or just a plurality, of delegations, which means Biden came within 51,734 popular votes of losing).

So, until you provide some credible evidence for "Sanders' supporters" (and you'll need a credible definition of who they were) throwing the '16 election to Trump, I stand by my original comments.

Expand full comment
255 more comments...

No posts

Ready for more?