In this diary I will explain how I see the political situation and what would be for me the path for a Democratic victory in the Presidential election of 2016. The diary will include also some note that can help in my opinión for an overall success of the American left in the cycle.
While I'm clearly to the left of most of the voters and the leaders of the Democratic Party, I think the global situation, internal and external, can not afford a Republican president in the United States after 2016.
PRIMARY FOR 2016
First some comments about what I expect in the primary. More in the way of an analysis than in the sense of what I would like ideologically. I'm clearly to the left of a big majority of the Democratic voters and leaders ideologically.
At this point, H Clinton seems the strongest leader in the Democratic Party looking for 2016 elections. She seems leading other potential candidates by big margins. I would like like that she turns a little to the left. but still, I do not think H Clinton is a bad solution for the Democratic Party. The people seems to support her and she is the clear favourite at this point.
Despite it, I expect some candidate else in the primary. Not many but yes someone. If one of these alternative candidates is able to reach a 15% of the vote in the primary, and is yong enough he can be condisdered one of the Democratic front-runners for the post H Clinton primary in 2020 or 2024.
In order to be considered for future races, a potential candidate must be now under 65 years old. I do not think a candidate over 70 years old (in 2020 or 2024) can be viable after H Clinton.
It is not easy to reach a 15% of the vote in a primary, but who is able to do it wins without doubt a national profile.
At this point unless a very big surprise, the Democratic candidate for 2016 seems to be H Clinton.
THE PATH FOR A DEMOCRATIC VICTORY IN 2016
The ideological line that need to follow the candidate should not have many differences with what has made B Obama a succesful candidate twice. It means that H Clinton need to take a position for 2016 to the left of her position in 2008. She need to run as the average Democratic candidate of today, if not she risks to see the turnout of the natural base of the party decreased.
The DNC place is defined, with Philadelphia being elected early in 2015. It is a good selection that can be enough to avoid risks in PA.
Surely, the most important part to be defined still is the selection of VP. If H Clinton is successful in 2016, then her VP can become another clear frontrunner for the post-H Clinton Democratic primary, again, being young enough for it. Her election is very important at this point , not only in order to help her winning in 2016, but also in order to define the future leader of the Democratic Party. We will think about it in the poll.
In terms of where to fight in order to win, I think the Democratic nominee, likely H Clinton, will have a way that is not hidden at this point:
0.- We can assume without risk that there is a good number of states that will vote for the Democratic nominee, and will be solved with lower profile campaigning:
HI
VT
NY
RI
MD
MA
CA
NJ
CT
IL
ME (except ME-02)
Without forget that there is an important senate election in IL with a Republican incumbent.
1.- The first real step in the path for a Democratic victory would be to assure some states that have a Democratic leaning at this point in presidential elections. In these states will be necessary to keep campaigning tension and investment, bigger or smaller according to the circunstances:
WA
OR
NM
MI
WI
MN
ME-02
NH
PA
From what I see in the public polling results only in a Republican wave some of these states would go for the Republicans. And I do not see the Republicans fighting hard these states by the following reasons:
- I do not see WA, OR, and NM falling for the Republicans before than NV and CO. Still some tensión is necessary in these states basically in order to help to the blue team in the gubernatorial elections in WA and OR and to avoid a bad effect of the possible presence of S Martínez (NM) in the ticket.
Still, I do not think the presence of S Martínez in the ticket would give NM to the Republicans, taking in to account her results in the public polling in the state.
- I do not see MI, WI and MN falling for the Republicans before than IA. In this case a strong campaigning tensión is necessary because there is an important senate election in WI and because it is posible to see some Republican from these states in the ticket. There is a chance to see R Snyder (MI), T Pawlenty (MN) or S Walker (WI) in the ticket, specially the last.
Like in the case of NM, I do not think their presence would be enough to give some of these states to the Republicans, like it was not enough to have P Ryan in the ticket in 2012. I do not think these states would fall for the Republicans except in a Republican wave.
- I do not see ME-02, NH and PA falling for the Republicans before than VA. Again a strong campaigning tension is necessary because there are important senate elections in NH and PA. Also there is a probability, not high, to see S Collins (ME), K Ayotte (NH), P Toomey (PA) or R Santorum (PA) in the ticket.
Despite the PVI of booth states, I think the effort needed to keep NH and PA will be lower than the effort needed in 2012. In the case of NH, because M Romney was a candidate with some stronger than habitual local appeal, and in the case of PA because the DNC in Philadelphia can help. Also H Clinton can have bigger local appeal than B Obama in the area (the North East has not been his strongest área).
Finally, surely the effort needed to keep WA, OR and NM will be lower than the effort needed to keep MI, MN, WI, ME-02, NH and PA. But all these states-districts are must win in the path for a Democratic victory in 2016. Surely the lose of some of these states would come after loses of other key states, and would not be compatible with a Democratic victory in my opinión.
2.- The next step in the Democratic path for a victory in 2016 would be to reach 270 electoral votes, winning enough between the states that can be in the middle of the electoral votes (250 to 280). These are the states that I expect to be in this position:
NV
IA
CO
VA
The Democratic Party can afford to lose some of them without losing the race:
- To win all the states in the steps 0 and 1 + NV + VA = 270 electoral votes. The Democratic Party can afford to lose IA and CO winning the other 2.
- To win all the states in the steps 0 and 1 + IA + VA = 270 electoral votes. The Democratic Party can afford to lose NV and CO winning the other 2.
- To win all the states in the steps 0 and 1 + CO + VA = 273 electoral votes. The Democratic Party can afford to lose NV and IA winning the other 2.
- To win all the states in the steps 0 and 1 + NV + IA + CO = 272 electoral votes. The Democratic Party can afford to lose VA winning the other 3.
- To win all the states in the steps 0 and 1 + NV + IA + VA = 276 electoral votes. The Democratic Party can afford to lose CO winning the other 3.
- To win all the states in the steps 0 and 1 + NV + CO + VA = 279 electoral votes. The Democratic Party can afford to lose IA winning the other 3.
- To win all the states in the steps 0 and 1 + IA + CO + VA = 279 electoral votes. The Democratic Party can afford to lose NV winning the other 3.
Bolded, the options that mean the minimun number of states necessary to reach the 270 electoral votes needed in orther to win.
In other words, winning VA, the Republicans need only 2 of these states in order to win, and without VA, the Republicans need the remaining 3 states.
Taking into account, that the Republicans have not a local politician from VA to find a bounce in the state, the Republicans have a serious trouble here. In the other states, they have some solid options to be in the ticket: B Sandoval (NV), T Branstad (IA), C Gardner (CO), D Heller (NV) or even J Ernst (IA). They can select one of them, but it is unlikely that the selected option can help in more tan 2 of the 4 states (CO and NV can have close trends).
The Democratic Party can not afford to avoid a fight in these states. NV and CO have important senate seats to defend and it is not difficult to see that IA and VA can be easier than the states unlisted until now. Even if the things go well, the Democratic Party can be able to win all the four states. At same time, the Republicans can not afford to avoid a serious fight in all these 4 states because other options included in the step 1 would be harder for them. Then a strong fight in all them is assured in my opinión.
3.- There are some states where the Democratic nominee would have a chance of winning but that would not be between the 270 first electoral votes for the Democratic Party:
OH
FL
NC
I tend to think that no-one of the states listed in the step 1 (WA, OR, NM, MI, WI, MN, NH and PA) can fall for the Republicans before than the most favourable beteween OH, FL and NC.
I would not say the same about the states listed in the step 2 (NV, IA, CO and VA). CO and NV are looking more volatile this cycle, but there are 4 easy political relations that in adition to the previous paragrah make not possible OH, FL or NC being in the initial 270 electoral votes for the Democratic party. There are the following:
- I do not think IA can fall for the Republicans before OH.
- I do not think VA can fall for the Republicans before FL or NC.
- I do not think VA can fall for the Republicans before OH.
- I do not think IA can fall for the Republicans before FL or NC.
If you agree not with the explained in the last two paragrahps about political relations between states, then you may see posible some combination with OH, or FL or NC inside the initial 270 electoral votes for the Democratic Party.
For this election, the Republicans can not afford to lose some of these states in their path for a victory, then it is assured that they will invest heavily in these states. In order to win the election losing NC they would need to win all the states listed in the step 2, and to win the election losing OH or FL they would need the same plus to win some of the states listed in the step 1. All it very unlikey in my opinión.
Also they have some good options to find a local bounce in these states. The RNC will be in OH, and also they have some strong options from these states to be in the ticket like J Kasich (OH), R Portman (OH), J Bush (FL), M Rubio (FL), P McCrory (NC) or R Burr (NC).
I think the Democratic Party also plans to invest heavily in these states, but with one difference. In case of financial need in more critical states of the previous steps, they can decrease the spending in OH, FL or NC. Also the Democratic Party has less strong politicians from these states to find a local bounce (see the poll of this diary).
4.- At this point and looking at the public polling results, I seriously doubt that the Democratic Party can afford to figth in aditional states, because OH, FL and NC are very expensive, but if the cycle goes toward a Democratic wave, it would be possible to win some state plus. Maybe:
IN
MO
GA
AZ
more?
But I don not think this is likely and I do not think the spending in these states will be strong, except in the last weeks and in an environment of Democratic wave.
THE PROSPECT OF THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY FOR 2016
If we take into account the national polling public results, it seems that H Clinton has some advantage over her Republican challengers, but not too big. According with my calculus, the closests cases would be:
+6.25% H Clinton (D) vs M Romney (R) Not running.
+7.50% H Clinton (D) vs R Paul (R)
+8.50% H Clinton (D) vs J Bush (R)
But the public polling statewide is closer, and even is giving to the Republicans advantage in some important states like NV (only vs B Sandoval), CO, FL (only vs J Bush) and NC.
It is necessary to say that at this point a victory of the Democratica candidate in 2016 is far from assured. No-one should take it for granted. Still it is necessary a hard work in order to win this election.
To finish this diary, we can think about who can be the best selection for Vice President in the Democratic ticket of 2016. The selection can help to the Democratic Party in the way to win the election. In the poll are included the most prominent "young" Democratic politicians from the states included in the steps 2 and 3 (in the case of NV and IA there are older because of the lack of younger alternatives), plus some strong alternative that can be important looking at the future leadership of the Democratic Party. There is not space for more people in the poll.