After last nights debate. See it here. Only a 13% chance of winning the nomination, Clinton at 77%. Some of the comments follow. The first agrees with me on the gun issue.
hjenten: Can I note that the harshest attack of the night came
from Clinton? It was on guns against Sanders. That, to me, suggests
Sanders isn’t going to go after Clinton in the way he would need to in
order to win.
faraic: Yes, Sanders’ gun retorts didn’t come across as
sufficient to the tragedies of the day. If he was going to offer a
rationale for his position, it needed more of a perspective than just
that he represents rural voters.
hjenten: He did a nice job on “black lives matter,” but that gun answer was flat out awful.
natesilver: The gun answer was WTF bad.
They think Sanders will continue to influence the agenda, but unless he fights back against Clinton his chances diminish dramatically.
faraic: Agreed. Going negative in political ads and rhetoric
has more of an impact on races than positive talk. So while Sanders’
statements were refreshing to a lot of people, and not just Clinton
supporters, I also think it makes him seem less in direct contention
with Clinton. And if he is not her adversary, then is he in the race
mainly to raise issues? It brings back to that question of intent.
hjenten: There are two ways Sanders wins: 1. Biden enters, or
2. Sanders goes after Clinton if Biden doesn’t enter. Sanders needs to
pull some of Clinton’s support in the second scenario, as she is pulling
a clear majority in polls that don’t include Biden (for the most part).
Being kind to Clinton on emails does not help Sanders in either of
these.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.