GOP eyes remain fixed on March 15; Dems still slouching toward Hillary

"OK, Sen. Sanders, that's about all the fun the presi-, er, former first lady, will tolerate."

“OK, Sen. Sanders, that’s about all the fun the presi-, er, former first lady, will tolerate.”

Four more states voted Tuesday in the Republican nominating process. Not much changed. We’re still waiting for March 15.

Donald Trump won three states. Ted Cruz won one. John Kasich finished a close, but disappointing, third in Michigan. Marco Rubio continued a free-fall apparently induced by the same attacks on Trump that seem to have sparked Cruz’s upward trajectory.

Once again, Trump won less than 40 percent of the cumulative vote; he’s now at about 35 percent overall in the states that have voted, mirroring his standing in most recent national polls. Once again, Trump won less than 50 percent of the delegates awarded; he remains at less than 45 percent of those awarded to date. Once again, Cruz nearly equaled his delegate haul (receiving 59 to Trump’s 73).

Once again, we’re waiting for the winner-take-all states, particularly Ohio and Florida.

Super Tuesday is more than a week behind us, but next Tuesday is shaping up as the most important day of voting. The second-largest amount of delegates (367) will be up for grabs, more than will be available in the 40 days that follow as the calendar slows down considerably. The emerging consensus seems to be that Kasich is clearly, but not insurmountably, behind Trump in Ohio and that Rubio is hoping for a miracle in Florida. I haven’t checked in with the Kasich camp in a while, but the Georgia folks with ties to the Rubio campaign seem convinced, based on their internal polling, that his chances are far better than the public polls indicate. We shall see. But even if Rubio pulls off that win, it is hard at this point to see how he’d do anything more than accumulate delegates for leverage at a contested convention. His drop-off since Super Tuesday has been that pronounced; consider the math he faces now:

***

I haven’t written much about the Democratic race in a while, but Bernie Sanders’ upset of Hillary Clinton in Michigan last night is worth a look, I think.

We have a small sample size, just 15 states where exit or entrance polls have been conducted. But if there’s a pattern to whether Clinton Sanders wins, it’s this: Clinton wins when she gets more than 45 percent of the white vote and more than 75 percent of the black vote. Each time she’s fallen below one of those levels, Sanders has won. That, rather than the sheer makeup of the electorate in each state, seems to be the dividing line.

That reinforces a couple of points. First, while much has been made about Sanders’ success with white Democrats, Clinton has more than held her own with that segment. She has won a majority of white Democrats more often than Sanders among states with exit/entrance polling (8 to 7). Second, if Clinton were facing a candidate who had any appeal to black Democrats whatsoever, she would be facing a repeat of 2008. Even someone who could consistently hit even 30 percent among that demographic could conceivably be beating her right now. And despite his ineptitude courting black voters, Sanders is, thanks in large part to that Michigan win, forcing her into a longer contest than she ever wanted, or probably expected in her heart of hearts. Clinton isn’t as weak a front-runner in her race as Trump is in his, but she could have been beaten and, once we get to the general election, still could be. But she may have the luck this time around of having to face only opponents who are even less capable of winning over voters than she is.

***

One final point: The Republican National Committee’s efforts to front-load the primary calendar in the hopes of producing a winner more quickly than in previous years just might be working. If Trump wins Ohio and/or Florida, the math for Cruz or anyone else will be daunting and the rest of the contest more or less a formality. It’s just that the beneficiary of this tinkering isn’t the establishment favorite it was intended to be.

Let this be a warning to those who favor changes to the electoral process, including but not limited to Republicans who have gotten behind the National Popular Vote movement: You might know what the changes would do, but you never know who would reap the rewards. If it ain’t really broke, don’t fix it.

Reader Comments 0

98 comments
lvg
lvg

Amazing how low voltage Cons like Lil Barry don't realize Hillary is running as a conservative Democrat same as Bill did.Cutting welfare and increasing criminal penalties has not been popular with minorities. She is successfully overcoming left wing challenges from Sanders and the extreme left that wants more government social programs and $$$.Obama is only president I can remember who has cut SS benefits before a national election.

The former first lady being buried today was married to a President who clearly could have been indicted like Nixon for felonies like many members of his administration were. Lil Barry probably has dementia like Saint Ronald and forgets the Iran-Contra scandal.How many members of the Clinton or Obama administration have even been indicted?


Yeah keep spouting that GOP nonsense about entitlements , hatred of Muslims and felonies Lil Barry does here every day. It helps independent know why GOP is disintegrating and letting one of two fascists take over.


Wascatlady
Wascatlady

No comment yet on the Whispering Sisters of Republican Candidates last night?

ByteMe
ByteMe

Kyle, at this point, it's not about "winning", it's about denying Trump the number of delegates he needs to succeed on the first ballot.  All the big money will focus on that.  The odds as you highlighted are getting too long for anyone but Trump or Cruz to win, but the big money isn't in love with either, so they'll hope for the best by keeping either from winning.

Jefferson1776
Jefferson1776

Why does the GOP politicians run the duds, are they really that stupid or what?  Yes they are.

Eye wonder
Eye wonder

@Jefferson1776

"Going into the 2016 election cycle the GOP has a deep bench, the deepest in a generation. People of gravitas and experience. A diverse group, including women, hispanics and blacks, among other minorities."

That will never not be funny.

Lil_Barry_Bailout
Lil_Barry_Bailout

With your sentence structure, maybe you shouldn't be calling anyone "stupid".

Caius
Caius

From Frank Luntz in USA Today:


"If you want to understand today’s young Americans, consider this: 58% of them think “socialism” is the most compassionate political system, compared with just 33% who pick “capitalism.”  Heck, 9% even voted for “communism.”

In our recent national survey of 1,000 first- and second-time voters ages 18 to 26, Republicans weren’t just off on the wrong track. They were barely on the radar....

Fully 44% identify themselves as Democrats, higher in my polling than any age cohort in America. By comparison, about 15% call themselves Republican, lower than any age cohort. The remaining 42% say they’re independent, but on issue after issue they lean toward the Democrats."

Bottom line for Luntz is that the future is not Republican.  This is the result of 80 plus years of Social Security, SS disability, Medicare, Medicade, WIC, Medicare Part D , etc, etc, etc.


Lil Barry you are about 75 years to late.  Your problem is not with the people taking the checks but the Democratic and Republican congresses who have authorizing the checks for the last 80+ years.

You will vote to send the same senator and congressman back to Washington that is there today.  The president will change but presidents can do nothing on domestic policy unless congress approves.  And congress has been in an approving mood for decades.


I will leave this tidbit from Luntz with you my friends: " 58% in our poll say that “America isn't any better or worse than most other countries,” compared with a 42% minority that believes “America is exceptional. It's better than every other country in the world.” 

 

 

lvg
lvg

LIl Barry and Trump are adored by people who are narrow minded bigots and obstructionists.Same people are the the Southern strategy of GOP that is now crumbling. Humiliating the 47% who get some form of gov't check ( including veterans, elderly, disabled and children) sure worked wonders for  Daddy Warbucks in the 2012 election didn't it?

Lil_Barry_Bailout
Lil_Barry_Bailout

@lvg

People who choose to take some of what their neighbor earned instead of working for a living humiliate themselves.

MarkVV
MarkVV

@lvg There are human fossils, who are incapable for thinking beyond their slogans about government handouts, evil of welfare and similar topics. Essentially, those are people who are fundamentally unsuitable to live in an organized, civilized society, but they have been forced to live in one because of the accident of birth. I know who they are here, you know who they are, and all we can do is to have pity for them and let them vent their bile here.

LilBarryBailout
LilBarryBailout

Clinton does well with people who are on welfare.

Sanders does well with people who wish they were on welfare.

Democrats: The party of losers and parasites.

Hedley_Lammar
Hedley_Lammar

@LilBarryBailout Red States


The ones who vote Republicans


Have the highest percentages of people on welfare.


Of course, Fox News doesn’t tell their cult are that the people most likely to be on food stamps aren’t in blue states like California, but in red states like Mississippi, where more than 21% are on food stamps. Mississippi is also distinguished as the reddest of the red states, along with Wyoming. In other words, the food stamp users are Fox News’ base. 

Lil_Barry_Bailout
Lil_Barry_Bailout

@Hedley_Lammar @LilBarryBailout

As I documented before over at Jay's (and got banned as a result) more welfare recipients live in blue states than in red.

Your percentages are cute but they don't drive spending on handouts.  The number of handout takers does.

Hedley_Lammar
Hedley_Lammar

@Lil_Barry_Bailout @Hedley_Lammar @LilBarryBailout  As I documented before over at Jay's (and got banned as a result) more welfare recipients live in blue states than in red.


You are wrong


Way more welfare recipients in Red States. 1 in 5 people in Mississippi.


In fact the red states are by far the biggest moochers. Getting back far more than they send in to the Federal Govt.


Blue States keep the red states up to a certain standard. Always have.

Lil_Barry_Bailout
Lil_Barry_Bailout

Thanks for citing the numbers in one state and extrapolating them to the rest of the country. Meaningless drivel.

But the fact is that the majority of welfare takers live in blue states.

Aren't you supposed to be from the party that owns math and evidence?

Hedley_Lammar
Hedley_Lammar

@Lil_Barry_Bailout Thanks for citing the numbers in one state and extrapolating them to the rest of the country. Meaningless drivel.


Yeah Mississippi is unique LOL


Actually its a fairly consistent pattern.


As it turns out, it is red states that are overwhelmingly the Welfare Queen States. Yes, that's right. Red States — the ones governed by folks who think government is too big and spending needs to be cut — are a net drain on the economy, taking in more federal spending than they pay out in federal taxes. They talk a good game, but stick Blue States with the bill.

Take a look at the difference between federal spending on any given state and the federal taxes received from that state. We measure the difference as a dollar amount: Federal Spending per Dollar of Federal Taxes. A figure of $1.00 means that particular state received as much as it paid in to the federal government. Anything over a dollar means the state received more than it paid; anything less than $1.00 means the state paid more in taxes than it received in services. The higher the figure, the more a given state is a welfare queen.


Of the twenty worst states, 16 are either Republican dominated or conservative states.


Even you can understand that.


Red states are and will continue to bee the biggest moochers. 

Lil_Barry_Bailout
Lil_Barry_Bailout

@Hedley_Lammar @Lil_Barry_Bailout

And as I've pointed out before, states like Mississippi still have a good number of Democrats, and it is the Democrats in those red states who are the lion's share of the welfare takers.

It's also true that the majority of welfare takers live in blue states.

Hedley_Lammar
Hedley_Lammar

@Lil_Barry_Bailout @Hedley_Lammar And as I've pointed out before, states like Mississippi still have a good number of Democrats


Yes they do


And Blue states have Republicans


Does Not change the fact that states that vote Red are the biggest moochers.


Those facts are undeniable.


Without Blue state subsidies most red states couldnt make ends meet. 

Hedley_Lammar
Hedley_Lammar

@Lil_Barry_Bailout @Hedley_Lammar The Republican Party, and conservatives in general, complain constantly about the “moochers” and the “takers” and the “freeloaders” on the Left. On their account, it’s the liberal leeches in the blue states who want free stuff from Uncle Sam, who live off the tax dollars of hard-working Americans. This is the narrative continually spun by the GOP and by right-wing ideologues.


Well, it’s not even remotely true, and the data proves it. The latest study, published Wednesday by the Tax Foundation, confirms what we’ve known for a long time: Conservative states rely disproportionately on federal funding for revenues.


So it’s the rugged individualists in the South who suck endlessly on the government’s teat, not the “limousine liberals” in New York and California. If you live in Mississippi or Kentucky or Louisiana or Tennessee or Georgia or Alabama or South Carolina, you likely receive more in federal assistance than you pay in taxes.




Hedley_Lammar
Hedley_Lammar

@Lil_Barry_Bailout @Hedley_Lammar http://www.politicususa.com/2014/06/13/study-finds-14-15-biggest-moocher-states-republican-controlled.html


 It is noteworthy that the states most dependent on the federal government are primarily in the South where hating the government, and Democrats, is as prevalent as mooching off of other taxpayers’ largesse. It is time for Republican-controlled states to start pulling their own weight and contributing to this nation instead of living off the generosity of the federal government

Hedley_Lammar
Hedley_Lammar

@Lil_Barry_Bailout @Hedley_Lammar Of the twenty worst states, 16 are either Republican dominated or conservative states. Let's go through the top twenty.

  • New Mexico: $2.03
  • Mississippi: $2.02
  • Alaska: $1.84
  • Louisiana: $1.78
  • West Virginia: $1.76
  • North Dakota: $1.68
  • Alabama: $1.66
  • South Dakota: $1.53
  • Kentucky: $1.51
  • Virginia: $1.51
  • Montana: $1.47
  • Hawaii: $1.44
  • Maine: $1.41
  • Arkansas: $1.41
  • Oklahoma: $1.36
  • South Carolina: $1.35

Shall I continue ? 



Hedley_Lammar
Hedley_Lammar

@Lil_Barry_Bailout @Hedley_Lammar The overwhelming majority of states who depend on federal assistance are Southern red States


Blue states have been subsidizing the poor red ones for decades


You better hope they dont get tired of your mooching

Hedley_Lammar
Hedley_Lammar

@Lil_Barry_Bailout @Hedley_Lammar Your welcome.


And they aren't random numbers


They are what states get back vs what they send in


You see Southern Red States get more than a dollar back for every dollar they send in.


And they stick blue states with the bill

lvg
lvg

@LilBarryBailoutLIl barry's comments and Donalds (along with most o fthe extreme right wing cons) do well with low voltage readers of this blog who are mysoginists, bigots, xenophobes and racists.

JohnnyReb
JohnnyReb

@lvg @LilBarryBailout you got the name calling down, I must say.

Too bad you and yours aren't as good on workable solutions to problems.

Name calling won't fix a thing.

Lil_Barry_Bailout
Lil_Barry_Bailout

@lvg @LilBarryBailout

Go ahead and point out any factual errors I posted, or any indication of raaaaaaaaaacism.

Or are you one of those who believes tax cuts are racist?

LMAO!

s e
s e

A survey of Georgia voters  showed 74% overall support for the idea that the President should be the candidate who receives the most popular votes in all 50 states.


By political affiliation, support for a national popular vote for President was 75% among Republicans, 78% among Democrats, and 67% among others. 

By gender, support was 80% among women and 68% among men. By age, support was 68% among 18-29 year olds, 77% among 30-45 year olds, 74% among 46-65 year olds, and 76% for those older than 65. 


In Gallup polls since 1944, only about 20% of the public has supported the current system of awarding all of a state's electoral votes to the presidential candidate who receives the most votes in each separate state (with about 70% opposed and about 10% undecided).

Support for a national popular vote is strong among Republicans, Democrats, and Independent voters, as well as every demographic group in every state surveyed recently.  In the 41 red, blue, and purple states surveyed, overall support has been in the 67-81% range - in rural states, in small states, in Southern and border states, in big states, and in other states polled. 

Most Americans don't ultimately care whether their presidential candidate wins or loses in their state or district . . . they care whether he/she wins the White House. Voters want to know, that even if they were on the losing side, their vote actually was equally counted and mattered to their candidate. Most Americans think it is wrong that the candidate with the most popular votes can lose. We don't allow this in any other election in our representative republic.


NationalPopularVote

JohnnyReb
JohnnyReb

@s e A huge number of people use to smoke.

They stopped or did not start once they were educated on the harm.

Same would be true on abolishing the Electoral College.

To the low information voter, popular vote might sound good but even those would change once educated.

There are decades of history on Liberals trying to abolish the EC.

Nice try, but no cigar.

Forgetaboutit

s e
s e

@JohnnyReb @s e The National Popular Vote bill does not abolish the Electoral College.


The Electoral College is now the set of 538  dedicated party activists we vote for, who vote as rubberstamps for presidential candidates


With National Popular Vote, the 270+ dedicated party activist electors in the enacting states, will be supporters of the presidential candidate receiving the most popular votes in all 50 states (and DC) meeting, as usual, in mid-December to cast their totally predictable rubberstamped votes in accordance with their pre-announced pledges to elect the President.

s e
s e

@JohnnyReb @s e  "Low information voters"


Current and past presidential candidates with a public record of support for the National Popular Vote bill:  Congressman John Anderson (R, I –ILL), Senator Birch Bayh (D-IN), Senator and Governor Lincoln Chafee (R-I-D, -RI), Governor and former Democratic National Committee Chair Howard Dean (D–VT), U.S. House Speaker Newt Gingrich (R–GA), Senator and Vice President Al Gore (D-TN), Ralph Nader, Governor Martin O’Malley (D-MD), Congressman Tom Tancredo (R-CO), and Senator Fred Thompson (R–TN).

Current and past presidential candidates who supported direct election of the President in the form of a constitutional amendment: George H.W. Bush (R-TX-1969), Jimmy Carter (D-GA-1977), Hillary Clinton (D-NY-2001),  Bob Dole (R-KS-1969),  Gerald Ford (R-MI-1969), and Richard Nixon (R-CA-1969).