There was an interesting piece today about current polling on voter views towards the two main candidates for the Democratic Presidential nomination, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and Senator Bernie Sanders. The results indicate why, even if Sanders makes strong showings in Iowa and New Hampshire, Hillary Clinton remains the strong favorite.
A piece in the Washington Post breaks down distinct differences in the numbers between white and non-whites regarding support for the two main candidates, Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton. The focus is on reaction to the email controversy, but the analysis is broader and goes to some of the relative strengths of the candidates and the challenges these pose for their opponents.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/...
Just to note - I am a Hillary Clinton supporter. That said, I'd like to try and approach this issue fairly given that ethnic and racial voting disparities can be sensitive topics subject to misuse.
On Hillary's side of the ledger, it is not just that she is well-known. The Clintons have throughout their careers made sustained outreach to minority communities, and in particular have helped a great many federal, state and local elected officials. There are also a great many black and Latino former political appointees from Bill's Administration and outreach continued and was maintained while Hillary was a Senator/Secretary of State and Bill and Chelsea continued their work through the Clinton Foundation. That is not to say support is unanimous - Professor Cornel West, for example, is a strong supporter of Sanders. But by and large, as the article points out, Hillary can count on a strong base of support from minority voters. It is support built not just on policies, but on decades of exposure face to face, in thousands of meetings and settings from small to large. The departure of many African-American voters to Obama in 2008 was a break from this, but several things occurred to largely mend this. First, Hillary went and loyally served as a subordinate to President Obama. She went out of her way not only not to be a thorn in his side, but to be an asset. People see that and value it. Second, it appears, at least from the numbers of Obama people already working on her campaign, that Obama will be supportive of her candidacy, even if it is just indirectly (although I expect him to eventually endorse her).
On Sanders side of the ledger is his strong message of economic populism. The expectation and hope here, I think, is that as minority voters get to know him better, they will come to see his policies as more in line with their class interests. This approach has caused some friction, e.g. the dust up with BLM over whether the emphasis on class de-emphasizes race, but the Sanders campaign seems to have adapted its message.
But at some point, if Sanders expects to get the nomination, he is going to have to change those Latino and African American numbers. What options does he have to do so?
The high road, basically what Sanders is doing now, basically would continue positively casting himself as the force of popular change and the best choice for working people to fight back against economic royalism.
I don't think this will work in moving the minority voter numbers for two reasons. First, it is an approach that Hillary can easily co-opt, and is in fact something she has now been doing regularly. Second, it will be hard to turn Hillary into a right winger in sheep's clothes, since voters remember decades of actual right wingers bashing Hillary as a shrieking "femi-nazi" socialist.
Unless the idea is that wins in Iowa and New Hampshire will allow him to "surf" the rest of the way (a dubious proposition given how many historical examples exist of early-primary winners fading) Sanders will inevitably need to go on the attack. He will have to do so well before Super Tuesday and he won't have much time. The schedule after the New Hampshire and Iowa primaries moves swiftly into a range of more ethnically and racially diverse electorates, including southern states where, if as it appears most pro-Obama black voters are transferring loyalties back to the Clintons, Sanders will be in trouble. But how to attack?
This circles back to the real challenge. If the high road won't cut it, if even those people flirting with the idea of voting Sanders still expect Hillary to win, he needs to be aggressive.
If Bernie goes on the attack, he must be very careful. The email scandal, for example, shows how being attacked can strangely turn into a Hillary asset. The Republicans have been frothing at the mouth over it. But so far, if the Washington Post article is to be believed, it hasn't shaken Hillary's core support among non-whites.
I think a reason for this is minority voters are particularly sensitive to the long history in this country of the use of false charges and rumors to bring down politicians that they have supported. Both Bill and Hillary still remain largely regarded by most Democratic non-white voters as "one of ours." This goes way back to Whitewater, Monica, etc., where the kitchen sink was thrown at both Clintons by the right wing machine. Hillary is seen positively for having endured decades of slander and innuendo and it will be poison if Sanders seems to be trying that tactic.
What else is Sanders left with? The "Wall Street Puppet" charge, as noted above, is easily countered and unlikely to resonate with minority voters whose support of the Clintons is based on a long familiarity. Most minority voters, at present, do not buy the idea Hillary is a right winger who is against their interests.
Sanders can win as many DKOS polls as he likes, but he needs to solve the puzzle of the gap presented in this article or he cannot win. African American and Hispanic voters are key to victory for both the Democratic nomination and the General Election. Right now Hillary has a great edge in that support.