Once again, the supposed nominee for the Democratic Party has shot herself in the foot, but this time losing a large electorate in Ky, WV, Va. Ohio, Ill., WY, and Indiana.
The coal fields are all abuzz over comments she made that she was going to put a lot of coal miners and operators out of work
” Facing a backlash from Appalachian Democrats, Hillary Clinton’s campaign on Monday tried to reaffirm her commitment to coal communities one day after declaring on national television she was going to “to put a lot of coal miners and coal companies out of business….
The top three coal producing states of Wyoming, West Virginia and Kentucky all saw production declines of between 5 percent and 20 percent in 2015. In Ohio, site of Tuesday’s Democratic presidential primary, coal production is down 22 percent. Democrats in those states tried to distance themselves from Clinton’s comments.”..
Jesus H Christ. What in the world is this well seasoned politician thinking? She was supposed to have appeal to white working class voters in the south, Appalachia and other non-costal areas. Then she just flushed huge areas (of not just WV, but Ohio, Va, Ky, Tenn, and the Western coal producing states) down the tubes.
We all realize that coal, for power generation is fading out but to just kick millions of voters down the stairs on a “slip of the tounge”: voters she might need in Va or Ohio if the election is close, is plain stupid. Its political malpractice and considering the history of this candidate, its going to continue.
And that’s not counting the manufacturing votes lost due to flip flops on TPP and the NAFTA history with her husband.
Of course, if the campaign is following a bi-coastal strategy, with Ill. thrown in for fun, then who the hell cares if you alienate voters who don’t go to brokers for “wealth management”
And the Republicans are going to have a field day; it will damage down ticket state wide races. And what does it do for the Democratic Party when many of its candidates have to disavow the head of the Party? Its a disaster for areas that were possible to make inroads but now are totally out of reach. Thanks.
Now, of course, this isn’t the first, second, or 25th instance of this happening. So, how to make HRC a better candidate? Well, after 30-40 yrs of political experience, I’m not sure. Certainly replace some of the committee members in her head and maybe have them exert more pressure to keep her mouth shut? Maybe stop off the cuff interviews and only run scripted comments? I’m not sure; but unless there are real changes she will continue to piss off more and more voters until there are less than for the GOP nominee.
Ridge
” So, how to make HRC a better candidate? “
Shoot her. A dead dog would be better.
To be fair HRC wasn’t going to carry Wyoming, West Virginia and Kentucky anyway and coal hasn’t been a deciding factor in carrying IL, OH, and VA for some time now.
But this does illustrate the lack of vision, honesty, and purpose for all in the DEM Party. WRT coal, they vacillate between pandering to coal country voters who don’t have the income and power they once had when the UMWs was strong. Some of that loss was the result of federal labor law legislation, some of it was resulted from miners and their families not sticking with the union, and some of it was brought to them by neoliberal government economic policies. Why bother with the high cost to strip coal out of WV, etc. and deal with the treehuggers when that capital can be shipped to Colombia and the profit per ton delivered in the US is higher?
Truth — the coal extraction business in the US is in decline and will continue to decline. If we at the governmental level do nothing, that decline will also lead to lower pay and increased dangers for workers. Most of the big money earned from coal has long ago fled and made places like NY wealthy. So what should we do?
Say, “a lot of coal miners are going to lose their jobs,” or “we have time, but not too much, for a lot of coal miners to get safer jobs that pay well and if we are focused and committed to this, most, and quite possibly more, of those new jobs will be right here in these beautiful regions.”
HRC is a verbal klutz but the more fundamental problem is that she doesn’t have solutions for the scope of the problems. She parrots the superficial liberal consensus — coal bad and clean energy good.
I , and everyone else knows coal is in decline. But two points.
1) If you add all mining and related jobs, relatives and communities. You might get 2.8-3mill. votes. The popular margin for Obama over Romeny was 5 mil.
In the current electoral environment, with greater voter restrictions AND the high negative numbers for HRC, is it wise to endanger those votes? In certain states, it could mean the difference. In Obama vs Romney, five states had less than 5% vote difference; 4 for Obama. Does anyone think HRC is going to get more votes than Obama?
Florida, 0.88%
North Carolina, 2.04%
Ohio, 2.98%
Virginia, 3.87%
2) The Democratic Party is supposed to stand up for the people who get their hands dirty working. For its presumptive nominee to go on national TV and say, “I’m going to throw a whole industry out of work.” is stunning. I know there are competing forces in the party but you can be sure that other industrial workers are watching and wondering, “Is my job next?”
And what will be the position of the AFL-CIO, of which the UMWA is a member? Not a lot of current members but Lots of retirees. Even if the HQ endorses, that doesn’t mean the rank and file will follow.
If the goal is to get elected, is it wise to antagonize the historic base of the Party? Particularly against Trump who is appealing to those same voters you are throwing away?
Now, is the Democratic Party leaving its roots to be more of a bi-coastal party; leaving the fly over part of the country to the Republicans? From some of the comments on Kos to the same issue, the sneering dumb hillbilly attitude is present and they endorse that strategy. Problem is , it leaves NO margin for error during the general campaign. You have to win every state you need to get to 270.
Rolling dice with the nation’s future.
R
She needs the Bernie voters more than she needs the votes of those in coal extraction states that there is not reason to think won’t be as “red” in 2016 as they have been in the past four presidential elections.
The DEM party doesn’t give a shit about workers that get their hands dirty unless they are in a demographic that reliably votes DEM. And even then, they don’t care to give them much other than lip-service and warm fuzzies every now and then.
I’ve already stated why I found her comments unacceptable, but my reasons are outside the political considerations in this election and go to the heart of what we should all concern ourselves with in the long-term. Being concerned about her statement for her prospects in November isn’t a profitable line of inquiry or reasonable subject for critique. This isn’t one of her diss group X comments that will require her to say, “I’m sorry …” Those are only needed when she’s dissed a DEM voter faction, and they lap up her subsequent apologies as if they mean anything.
>She needs the Bernie voters more than she needs the votes of those in coal extraction states that there is not reason to think won’t be as “red” in 2016 as they have been in the past four presidential elections.<
But these were Bernie supporters, or commenting favorably on him. And if he isn’t the nominee, he certainly could be a spokesman into industrial areas for Democratic values. If the nominee just cut the legs out from under a whole industry…then no amount of policy papers are going to help (not that any will ever be implemented with the opposition in Congress she will face). She just shifted “possible” Trump voters to a “likely” Trump voters. And that was by no means assured. Everyone recognizes Trump is nuts, but if the alternative just threated to take your kid’s dinner off the table; what choice do you have?
AS for usefulness, if you just sweep these bonehead moves under the rug, all in the cause of PARTY UNITY, then why not be a damn Republican and follow orders from on high. Hell, either way we are going to get a Republican President, Either a Nixon Republican or a Romney Republican.
by at least pointing them out, and their consequences, maybe someone, somehow will convince her to think before she speaks and makes her election harder than it will be.
R
But she doesn’t need those voters. Just as Obama didn’t need them. What she said, is music to the ears of the partisan DEM base and she does need to increase enthusiasm among that base and hopefully pull in another part of the Obama “coalition” than isn’t yet “standing with her.” The intent was to assure those on the left that monies she’s taken from coal operators does not reflect her real position on coal.
Who knows if she has any authentic positions on anything? I evaluate based on past deeds and current and past affiliations. Couldn’t give a crap about any her after the fact apologies (usually extracted under pressure) because deeds and associations are less amenable to lying than words. But among Democrats, I’m clearly in the minority.
Does she need Ohio? or VA?
She lost Ohio to Trump, who was 2nd place finisher in the primaries. She can’t even defeat the Nut when her support is strongest? When you say “she doesn’t need those voters”, I’m saying she will need every damn one she can get. Obama, in his “sweep” of 2012 only won VA by 3.8% of votes cast. She think she going to repeat by throwing away 1/3 of the state and where she is viewed with suspicion by another 1/3?
Reports are she is doing poorly in the “rust belt”. Didn’t win Michigan. Lost plurality in Ohio to the 2nd place GOP finisher… Can you confidently say, Indiana, Ohio, and Michigan will vote for her in the General? If she loses those, and the inroads made in the South, and the Mt. West, What’s left? NE, FLA and Pacific Coast. Not enough to win the General.
Unless there is a split GOP ticket, a Trump/Clinton contest will be very close with Trump possibly winning.
Lord, I know I sound like my hair is on fire, but someone has to worry. She is horrible and shows no sign of getting better. In current condition, Trump will run over her in the media. If they have photos of him shaking Bin Laden’s hand, then maybe but very little else is going to stop him. Only by appealing, in a Democratic way, to the same issues he is raising could his appeal could be blunted. But the DNC masterminds have decided to run the 2008 Hillary playbook again. We know how well that worked.
R
HRC didn’t lose to Trump yesterday. Is there more excitement among GOP primary voters this year? Of course. Trump is exciting a lot of people that don’t normally participate in primary elections. And in OH he excited a lot of people to turnout and vote against him. Does that say anything about the general election turnout? Nobody knows. Half a million for Democrats than Republicans turned out in the IL primary. Does that mean IL is a slam dunk in November? Possibly but let’s not forget that IL has a GOP governor that most people seem to hate.
I appreciate that you’re trying to read the tea leaves from Clinton’s comments and from a comparison of party turnout as a general election projections, but you need more and better “dots.” As a Bernie supporter, I can say that neither of these data points carry any weight with me. Not saying that any such correlations couldn’t exist, but there’s no evidence that they do. Slow down. Collect historical data — the confirmation of your hypothesis and the dis-confirmation of it. Things that often seem logical or intuitive rarely hold up when carefully scrutinized.
Projecting or predicting how others or groups will respond to a statement by any candidate is fraught with peril For example in KY, people are very pleased with KYNECT (KY Obamacare), and yet, in the last gubernatorial race the GOP candidate promised to repeal KYNECT and the GOP voters that are the direct beneficiaries of KYNECT and want to keep it, trotted down to the polls and voted for the guy.
Of the votes cast in Ohio, Hillary came in 3rd. You can say there was an enthusiasm difference, but will that difference be made up by Nov? Interesting bet.
While the GOP has played its base for saps for decades, they have finally caught up to the scam and have a voice in Trump.
The Dem industrial base is declining but the Union organizations are still the core of the GOTV in the Midwest, and their support is not assured. They are catching on to the shift of the Democratic party to that of mid-level managers, tech investors, and money movers. They have a voice in Sanders until he is pushed down the well. His younger supporters, who see him speaking to their future can’t be depended on voting for HRC. Nor can Labor. Already Labor leaders are seeing their members gravitate to Trump-
“Trump, the worry goes, is making precisely the right appeals at precisely the right time to fundamentally realign the Rust Belt working class electorate’s traditional political allegiances.”
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/donald-trump-working-class-unions_us_56ead51fe4b03a640a69c58d
So any assumptions that Obama didn’t need this voting block and HRC won’t need them either is fighting the last war’s battles. In today’s environment, you cannot assume HRC will carry, Cleveland, Akron, Springfield, or any of the industrial cities of the Midwest. So yes, Ohio could go. If enough of working class go to Trump, along with the rural areas, Penn. could go GOP. She won’t get VA, even with the hard core support around DC. NC is out of reach. SC as well.
You can’t drop the South, Mountain West, South West, and assume you can win with the NE, Pacific Coast AND the Industrial Midwest when you are bleeding support in the core groups in the industrial Mid-West.
Praying for the GOP 3rd party run is foolish, they will fall in line. Talk of a contested convention is plausible and a much more attractive candidate could appear.
Right now, the only thing HRC has going for her is that she’s not Trump, Cruz, etc… Policy wise, except for the incipient fascism, they are not that far apart on the Big Things
Both want war in the Mideast
Both want to take it easy on Wall Street
Both are social semi-liberals
Trade, Trump want’s harder line, HRC- it depends.
So if I was a plant worker in Ohio, and the choice was HRC and Trump…the Union in their suits might be for HRC, but you couldn’t depend on me voting for her. What is she offering?
R
As someone from flyover territory, I heartily concur.
Precisely. You can vote for the sane (maybe) candidate who is going to ship jobs out and leave your kids with no future save as soldiers. Or you can vote for the nut case and hope he gives prosperity as Hitler did before crossing into Belgium. A tough choice, but I’ve been poor, cold, and hungry. Never again, even if I have to lift my stiff right arm.
Especially since there is a grassroots revolution going on in the Republican Party. There was one in the Democratic Party but it failed.
Yoursalient phrase:
There it is.
Deal wid it, folks.
Not all change is good, nor is all stasis. But…the DemRats are on the stasis side now.
During a time of mass dissatisfaction with how things are going, “stasis” is not a good bet.
Watch.
AG
I’m watching, Art.
I know y’are, Voice.
Me too.
It’s really all we can do.
It’s like watching the path of a predicted storm.
Run?
Hunker down and try to live through it?
Forget about it? It’s not what the media has it hyped up to be?
Somewhere hidden within all of those possibilities is the correct answer.
Damned if I know which one it is.
Hunkering, for now.
Bet on it.
We shall see, though. Soon enough.
Bet on that as well.
Later…
AG
She could always poll the Wall Street banks and find out what they want. She could even collect some speaking fees along the way.
She doesn’t have to poll Wall St. They let her know what they want before HRC is even aware that there is an issue.
Methinks you doth protest too much!!
Easy to say when you haven’t had several people say to you, “She wants to put my husband out of work. I don’t care if she is a woman, I’m not voting for her.” Or long time Union/Democratic families mention the CNN comments and say they won’t support her. Multiply that all over any coal producing areas in the nation and you can see where it may have an impact.
Sure not in some states, but in others, where it could be close; it may have consequences. And I don’t think this election is going to be a walkaway some do.
R
Just to emphasis my point-
Trump got more votes in Ohio than Hillary during the primaries, even though Trump lost to Kasich. So the 2nd place GOP finisher beat the Democratic winner during primary votes. Will this be reflected in the General? I don’t know but it makes no sense to throw away votes you might need later.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/clinton-trump-ohio_us_56e9a0b8e4b065e2e3d8314c
I think a lot of Democratic supporters are whistling past the grave yard.
R