Oklahoma in dem primaries

[𝕭𝖆𝖕𝖙𝖎𝖘𝖙𝖆 𝕸𝖎𝖓𝖔𝖑𝖆]

Maybe this is proof that Biden isn’t as polarizing as Hillary, or even Obama.  States such as OK and WV voted for Hillary in 2008 to stop Obama.  Then they voted for Bernie in 2016 to stick it to Hillary.  For some reason, OK didn’t use Bernie again to take a swipe at the established candidate in 2020, Biden.

I think it was more that in 2008, Bill Clinton was still quite popular in some of these states. Less so in OK but much moreso in states like WV and of course AR. I actually think Hillary could have won them in the general, as surreal as that seems based on the 2016 results. OK was similar demographically to those states, just redder, but the Democrats there still liked the Clintons. Hillary was the genuine WWC candidate in 2008, in part due to Bill's popularity with them, in part because she was running right of Obama, and in part due to, let's face it, Obama's melanin levels. Believe it or not whites with no degree were evenly split in partisan affiliation until right after Obama won in 2008, when they sharply shifted to the GOP. I wonder why that might have been... And I wonder if it still would have happened had Hillary won that year.

By 2016, Hillary was not only running a more socially liberal campaign than she was in 2008, but also was now tied to her former opponent Obama. Plus Bill's popularity had dropped off, being a more distant memory than he was in 2008. Now Obama, not Bill Clinton, was the (black) face of the party, and Hillary suffered because of that in these areas. Combine that with the aforementioned turn against the Democrats by WWC voters and the fact that right-wing media had spent the previous eight years relentlessly attacking Hillary in preparation for her run, and it's hardly a surprise that the remaining registered Dems in these areas turned on her. They weren't voting for Bernie, who most of them knew almost nothing about, just against her and the party/administration she represented.

In 2020, it was different for Biden. It was never about swiping at the "established" candidate -- that was Hillary in 2008, after all. It was really about swiping at the black candidate and then the corrupt liberal woman who supported him. Yes, Biden was Obama's VP. But he also is a white man. And now it's been a while since Obama was president so some of the hatred of him has faded. Plus Biden wasn't attacked constantly and demonized by right-wing media to the extent Hillary was. And he simply wasn't as "unlikable." So now it just came down to do you support the moderate white man or the socialist Jew? It's not exactly surprising who voters in these areas sided with when that is the choice. Bernie's views were also better known by this point. And by this point many of the remaining registered Democrats, while still more moderate, were actually loyal Democrats who may have even voted for Obama.

To those who might say I'm wrong to ascribe race and sex-based motives to these voting patterns: No, I'm not. It's all backed up by studies -- the turn on the Democrats after 2008 and the reason for it, the fact that white men are generally perceived as more moderate than racial minorities and women, all of it.

As someone from here I see little to disagree with in this take. One thing I'll add is that this time around Bernie's campaign was seen as much more "urban" and had more diversity of support, especially from Hispanic voters. Having surrogates like AOC certainly contributed to this, and while this was good for Bernie in places like California and parts of Texas, I think there was inevitably backlash among rural white Dixiecrats. I assumed early on that Biden would do really well in Little Dixie. Placing the voting patterns in primaries there as solely "anti-establishment" is generous.

I wouldn't really say though that Biden did really well in Little Dixie. Unless you want to count any vote for Bloomberg as a vote for Biden

[𝕭𝖆𝖕𝖙𝖎𝖘𝖙𝖆 𝕸𝖎𝖓𝖔𝖑𝖆]

Maybe this is proof that Biden isn’t as polarizing as Hillary, or even Obama.  States such as OK and WV voted for Hillary in 2008 to stop Obama.  Then they voted for Bernie in 2016 to stick it to Hillary.  For some reason, OK didn’t use Bernie again to take a swipe at the established candidate in 2020, Biden.

I think it was more that in 2008, Bill Clinton was still quite popular in some of these states. Less so in OK but much moreso in states like WV and of course AR. I actually think Hillary could have won them in the general, as surreal as that seems based on the 2016 results. OK was similar demographically to those states, just redder, but the Democrats there still liked the Clintons. Hillary was the genuine WWC candidate in 2008, in part due to Bill's popularity with them, in part because she was running right of Obama, and in part due to, let's face it, Obama's melanin levels. Believe it or not whites with no degree were evenly split in partisan affiliation until right after Obama won in 2008, when they sharply shifted to the GOP. I wonder why that might have been... And I wonder if it still would have happened had Hillary won that year.

By 2016, Hillary was not only running a more socially liberal campaign than she was in 2008, but also was now tied to her former opponent Obama. Plus Bill's popularity had dropped off, being a more distant memory than he was in 2008. Now Obama, not Bill Clinton, was the (black) face of the party, and Hillary suffered because of that in these areas. Combine that with the aforementioned turn against the Democrats by WWC voters and the fact that right-wing media had spent the previous eight years relentlessly attacking Hillary in preparation for her run, and it's hardly a surprise that the remaining registered Dems in these areas turned on her. They weren't voting for Bernie, who most of them knew almost nothing about, just against her and the party/administration she represented.

In 2020, it was different for Biden. It was never about swiping at the "established" candidate -- that was Hillary in 2008, after all. It was really about swiping at the black candidate and then the corrupt liberal woman who supported him. Yes, Biden was Obama's VP. But he also is a white man. And now it's been a while since Obama was president so some of the hatred of him has faded. Plus Biden wasn't attacked constantly and demonized by right-wing media to the extent Hillary was. And he simply wasn't as "unlikable." So now it just came down to do you support the moderate white man or the socialist Jew? It's not exactly surprising who voters in these areas sided with when that is the choice. Bernie's views were also better known by this point. And by this point many of the remaining registered Democrats, while still more moderate, were actually loyal Democrats who may have even voted for Obama.

To those who might say I'm wrong to ascribe race and sex-based motives to these voting patterns: No, I'm not. It's all backed up by studies -- the turn on the Democrats after 2008 and the reason for it, the fact that white men are generally perceived as more moderate than racial minorities and women, all of it.

As someone from here I see little to disagree with in this take. One thing I'll add is that this time around Bernie's campaign was seen as much more "urban" and had more diversity of support, especially from Hispanic voters. Having surrogates like AOC certainly contributed to this, and while this was good for Bernie in places like California and parts of Texas, I think there was inevitably backlash among rural white Dixiecrats. I assumed early on that Biden would do really well in Little Dixie. Placing the voting patterns in primaries there as solely "anti-establishment" is generous.

I wouldn't really say though that Biden did really well in Little Dixie. Unless you want to count any vote for Bloomberg as a vote for Biden

That's fair, although I think I was meaning really well in comparison to Clinton.

Well, in part it's a question of "absolute vote percentage" vs "margin of victory (or loss) to Sanders"