Why Did Hillary Clinton perform so strongly in the MI primary, just to lose them 8 years later? (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
April 29, 2024, 02:17:35 PM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion
  U.S. Presidential Election Results
  2008 U.S. Presidential Election Results (Moderator: Dereich)
  Why Did Hillary Clinton perform so strongly in the MI primary, just to lose them 8 years later? (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: Why Did Hillary Clinton perform so strongly in the MI primary, just to lose them 8 years later?  (Read 1386 times)
Jim Crow
Rookie
**
Posts: 206
United States


« on: May 26, 2023, 07:02:40 PM »

Trump's position on trade helped him in the rust belt states among older Democrats.  He turned out the vote better than his predecessors did.
Logged
Jim Crow
Rookie
**
Posts: 206
United States


« Reply #1 on: May 27, 2023, 12:55:37 PM »

Trump's position on trade helped him in the rust belt states among older Democrats.  He turned out the vote better than his predecessors did.

Hillary lost the 2016 primary in Michigan, nothing to do with Trump.

She was polling ahead of Bernie by a wide margin in Michigan, and the state wasn’t even considered or talked about at all by the public. Then Bernie won it

I understand that.  It was the same in the general election and really in every national election she's been in.  She led Obama by 30 points and lost.  Her margin was 2-1 over Sanders and it became a single digit race.  Then we all saw what happened in the 2016 general after the polls favored her.
Logged
Pages: [1]  
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.017 seconds with 13 queries.