Why Hillary is inevitable in the primary (Effortpost inside)

[King]

There's a big assumption Kalwejt and others are taking in that Hillary will continue to fall now that she's campaigning. It's more likely that this is her floor.

Hillary is not bad at this politics thing. She lost in Iowa but came back to win New Hampshire and came back and fought through all 50 states. She simply got out muscled by an Obama who was even better at it. If Obama hadn't existed, most likely scenario is that she would have mopped the floor with Edwards and Co then beat McCain by a similar margin in the general.

The idea that saying Hillary is vulnerable is "combating the hacks" is wrong. The idea that every stage of a Presidential election must be competitive is the hackish idea. Noting Hillary is a lock to be the Democratic nominee and likely the next President is the factual evidence. Anyone without any bias about this race, who opens up the polls and information about the 2016 race without prior judgement, would determine Hillary will win. Only people who have the agenda of looking for the conclusion that she will not win say otherwise.

[King]

Noting Hillary is a lock to be the Democratic nominee and likely the next President is the factual evidence. Anyone without any bias about this race, who opens up the polls and information about the 2016 race without prior judgement, would determine Hillary will win. Only people who have the agenda of looking for the conclusion that she will not win say otherwise.

I know you hate the Republican candidates and probably the Republican party in general, but even you have to admit that there is a SMALL chance (like 10%) that she could lose in 2016. Are you a totally deluded Hillary hack? What is this evidence you are talking about? Why do you think polls this early do mean anything? And people who say that the 2016 election will be competitive are biased and anti-Hillary hacks? Seriously?

Let's take polls out of it.

Who has the financial advantage (keep in mind all the GOP candidates will have to spend more in 2015 and the primaries)? Hillary Clinton
Who has the structural advantage (most base safe EVs to start)? Hillary Clinton, 253 EVs solid
Who has the most beloved brand name? Clinton
Who has the best surrogates (Bill Clinton, Barack Obama, Elizabeth Warren versus Mitt Romney... John McCain... George W. Bush... uh)? Hillary Clinton
Who has the more popular stance on potential major 2016 issues like minimum wage and SS/Medicare? Hillary Clinton
Does the GOP have any room to grow in white vote from 2012? No.
Does the GOP have any path to significant growth (at least a 20 point swing) in Hispanic or Black vote in 2016? No.
Can Scott Walker beat her in Florida? No. (That's 270)
Can Jeb Bush beat her in Ohio? No. (That's 270)
Can Rand Paul beat hear in Virginia? No. (That's 270)
Can Ted Cruz beat her in any swing state? No. (That's 270)

There's no path to 270 anywhere on the map for any GOP contender. Each one of them falls short in a critical swing state. The GOP is in a bad position. They have to SWEEP the swing states to win. They have less than 200 safe/solid EVs. This is impossible to win on.

In 2004, George W. Bush had Virginia, North Carolina, and Colorado locked in base. He only had to go on offense for Ohio or IA/NM/NV to win.

The resources are stretched too thin. The candidate would have to twist and pander too much.

[King]

Best-case scenario for Paul: He wins 292-246. And yes, I think he could make PA competitive (not kidding).

Rubio wins 274-264 (he loses VA narrowly).

Maybe Paul, but I don't see how he wins the nomination. The % chance he has of winning the general x the % chance he has of winning the nomination mean his odds of winning the election microscopic.

I have no clue how you could give any of those states to Rubio.

Mitt Romney won 61% of the white vote, a landslide not seen since Reagan.   The only direction it has to go is down. The Republican Party is making no attempts at inroads with Blacks, Hispanics, or Asians (Paul has, but again, he's not winning the nomination). Where are these voters to flip these states are going to come from?

Those states will be close because the GOP has a large floor of support, but there's nothing to suggest the Republican ceiling isn't below 50% in all of them with a Presidential electorate.

It's easy to press a button on the EV calculator and say Pennsylvania will vote for Rand Paul. People were able to press buttons in 2012 to give the election to Mitt Romney. But who are these people that are going to vote for Rand? It's not going to be any new whites. Any white person who didn't vote against Obama has no reason to vote against Clinton. He might do better with black voters, but he'd need to seriously flip about a third of them. Hispanic votes are not significant in the state.

[King]

What race are these younger voters? Majority black and hispanic. Even if the nominee tries, the GOP has too many loudmouths bad for PR and bad for business. Not even famous loud mouths, Republican voters on facebook and twitter that these young people read more than anything are absolutely vile representations of the GOP brand.

This also requires the assumption that Clinton and the Democrats are a static punching bag, helpless to campaign positively in their own right. By the time the GOP nominee is ready to start chipping away at the Pennsylvania black vote or Colorado latinos, it'll be too late.

Clinton will be able to launch a pseudo general election campaign from the start, just like Obama did in 2012. She'll have an arsenal of ridiculous GOP primary debates to define whoever the nominee will be from the start, just like Obama did in 2012. She'll have more money and more resources. She'll have the supermajority beloved Bill Clinton to campaign for her. She'll have the supermajority beloved (with non-whites) Barack Obama to campaign for her.

[King]

What race are these younger voters? Majority black and hispanic.

In PA, really?

Not in PA, but a significant amount and you'd have to go after them to win young voters.

Romney won young whites 18-29 by 7 points nationwide but lost 18-29 by 23 points. This magic bullet of finding more young white people to become Libertarians for Rand isn't going to happen. Winning young whites by 7 is about as good is it gets. You need to add black and brown to the coalition and it's not going to happen in 2016.

[King]

Walker could definitely beat her in Florida and Paul could win without Virginia.

What about Walker makes him a better fit than Clinton in Florida?