Will Hillary be the Democratic nominee? So asks Robin.

[Deleted]

Or will she blow it again.

What was supposed to be a coronation appears to be more than slightly wobbling, with Sanders gaining momentum (so to speak...)

& will the POTUS plus the swing vote of the Supreme Court being on the line this November concentrate minds.

Thoughts please.

[carlton43]

To early to be sure. But probably she will just make it but be damaged by the experience...........and might Bernie continue as a Socialist? Is that possible having been a candidate in a primary for another party?

[Davıd Boothroyd]

This is UK politics is it?

[Richard Allen]

Feb 15, 2016 13:37:49 GMT carlton43 said:

To early to be sure. But probably she will just make it but be damaged by the experience...........and might Bernie continue as a Socialist? Is that possible having been a candidate in a primary for another party?

No way will Sanders run third party or Independent if he loses, firstly by the time the primaries are done the filing deadlines will have past in most states, secondly it would put Republican in the White House and thirdly he would be ostracised by the Democrats in the Senate.

On the third point it is important to remember that if the Democrats were to take the Senate he stands to assume a position of significant influence. As a minimum he would become Chairman of the Budget Committee, where he is currently the ranking Democrat, and it is quite likely* he would become Chairman of the Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee (HELP). *The current lead Democrat on HELP is Patty Murray and she is likely to take over from the the retiring Barbara Mikulski as the lead Democrat on the Appropriations Committee.

[johnr]

There is a campaign with a lot of people signed up to it to write him in on the ballot paper if he is not the Democrat candidate.

I think I am right in saying that unlike the UK, that will count as a valid vote, and wont be considered invalid.

[Crimson King]

I'm not convinced the available choices fully cover the nuances of how one might want to reply. Whilst I think she will be the candidate there is no way I consider the coronation inevetable

[Deleted]

Feb 15, 2016 14:43:03 GMT Crimson King said:

I'm not convinced the available choices fully cover the nuances of how one might want to reply. Whilst I think she will be the candidate there is no way I consider the coronation inevetable

I wouldn't argue with that, but this is just about a snapshot at this point in time. If there had been a poll six months ago, I guess close to 100% would have gone yes, who knows in 6 weeks time. So hardly scientific, just interesting ....

& DB, yes, I shouldn't have put this in general UK ... but that's because I just think of it as 'general'...

Mods, can it move pls ?

AdminSTB

[jamie]

I think she will win it. The Democratic base is not hollowed out enough for Bernie to win and Hillary holds onto key demographics like older people and minorities along with a much greater lead in super delegates compared to 2008. However, of all the supposed 'far left fringe' surges in recent years around the world, Bernie has undoubtably been the most mainstream so I wouldn't be shocked if he won. He has been able to reach out to previously relatively unpoliticised groups like the WWC and clearly many of his ideas have now become mainstream or even the most credible. For that end, he had clearly benefited the Democratic Party.

[Deleted]

I voted for the second option as it is the most likely of the scenarios. However, it is not inevitable.

[mondialito]

It isn't inevitable, but Hillary should win. Two clear wins in Nevada and South Carolina should set her up nicely for Super Tuesday. Hopefully in the event of her victory in the primaries, Clinton will benefit from the having had a proper contest and Sanders urging his supporters to throw their weight behind her in order to stop a Republican victory.

[Merseymike]

I still wonder if it looks like Hillary will be the nominee but won't beat the Republican - because people may respect her but they sure don't like her - whether Elizabeth Warren would reconsider and step forward with Hillary using health as a reason to stand down?

[Deleted]

Why has the thread title been changed & why has the poll been taken down ??

[Crimson King]

I suspect the answer may be found on the 'Scottich politics overview' thread, and may relate to a popular beverage

[Merseymike]

Feb 17, 2016 21:13:10 GMT @pjones said:

Feb 17, 2016 20:57:23 GMT Merseymike said:

I still wonder if it looks like Hillary will be the nominee but won't beat the Republican - because people may respect her but they sure don't like her - whether Elizabeth Warren would reconsider and step forward with Hillary using health as a reason to stand down?

What possible motivation could Hillary have for stepping down? This is her last shot at the Presidency. If Trump beats her in the general election she won't be president but if she steps down for another candidate with a better chance of beating Trump then she still won't be president. If she steps down 'for the good of the party' then what's in it for her?

If its obvious she is going to lose. Not an auspicious climax to a career. Americans hate losing - and losers

[Richard Allen]

Feb 18, 2016 1:03:21 GMT Merseymike said:

Feb 17, 2016 21:13:10 GMT @pjones said:

What possible motivation could Hillary have for stepping down? This is her last shot at the Presidency. If Trump beats her in the general election she won't be president but if she steps down for another candidate with a better chance of beating Trump then she still won't be president. If she steps down 'for the good of the party' then what's in it for her?

If its obvious she is going to lose. Not an auspicious climax to a career. Americans hate losing - and losers

It is not obvious she is going to lose and despite her numerous flaws she has a far better chance of winning a general election that Warren ever would.

[neilm]

Feb 17, 2016 21:38:03 GMT @robin said:

Why has the thread title been changed & why has the poll been taken down ??

Yes, I was wondering where the poll had gone.

[jamie]

Feb 18, 2016 1:06:44 GMT Richard Allen said:

Feb 18, 2016 1:03:21 GMT Merseymike said:

If its obvious she is going to lose. Not an auspicious climax to a career. Americans hate losing - and losers

It is not obvious she is going to lose and despite her numerous flaws she has a far better chance of winning a general election that Warren ever would.

How so? If Sanders can be polling so well against Republicans compared to Hillary (although I do suspect it's because he hasn't been attacked much yet) then why wouldn't Elizabeth Warren do better? Compared to Sanders,  shes actually a Democrat so would get more money and endorsements from the party insiders, she has a more mainstream agenda, she's a woman etc. Compared to Clinton, she would actually excite the base and her only scandal is maybe/maybe not having Native American ancestry. 

[Deleted]

Feb 18, 2016 11:19:16 GMT jamie said:

Feb 18, 2016 1:06:44 GMT Richard Allen said:

It is not obvious she is going to lose and despite her numerous flaws she has a far better chance of winning a general election that Warren ever would.

How so? If Sanders can be polling so well against Republicans compared to Hillary (although I do suspect it's because he hasn't been attacked much yet) then why wouldn't Elizabeth Warren do better? Compared to Sanders,  shes actually a Democrat so would get more money and endorsements from the party insiders, she has a more mainstream agenda, she's a woman etc. Compared to Clinton, she would actually excite the base and her only scandal is maybe/maybe not having Native American ancestry. 

Well, in the US there are polls & polls.

It's interesting the polls that do appear to show Sanders beating Trump (for example) are being promoted by supporters of Trump.

Which does beg the question "do they have an ulterior motive" 

[Merseymike]

Feb 18, 2016 1:06:44 GMT Richard Allen said:

Feb 18, 2016 1:03:21 GMT Merseymike said:

If its obvious she is going to lose. Not an auspicious climax to a career. Americans hate losing - and losers

It is not obvious she is going to lose and despite her numerous flaws she has a far better chance of winning a general election that Warren ever would.

I actually don't agree there - Warren manages both to be very clever and a good communicator, but I honestly don't blame her for not wanting to do it
I don't think its obvious Hillary will lose either, although I don't warm to her and wouldn't be backing her now, but the republicans seem keen to enable her coronation. But it is all so febrile and unpredictable I am not ruling anything out

[Richard Allen]

Feb 18, 2016 11:19:16 GMT jamie said:

Feb 18, 2016 1:06:44 GMT Richard Allen said:

It is not obvious she is going to lose and despite her numerous flaws she has a far better chance of winning a general election that Warren ever would.

How so? If Sanders can be polling so well against Republicans compared to Hillary (although I do suspect it's because he hasn't been attacked much yet) then why wouldn't Elizabeth Warren do better? Compared to Sanders,  shes actually a Democrat so would get more money and endorsements from the party insiders, she has a more mainstream agenda, she's a woman etc. Compared to Clinton, she would actually excite the base and her only scandal is maybe/maybe not having Native American ancestry. 

Sanders general election numbers look great because he hasn't been subjected to anywhere near the scrutiny and attacks that Hilary Clinton has. That would change very quickly if he was the nominee.