11.03.2016 08:40 AM

My comment to a commenter

He’s a regular and he asked me what I thought was going on.  My answer:

All that has happened is the remaining gettable independent vote (mainly Libertarian) has gone to him. The earlier gettable independents (mainly Greens) went to her.

This was always going to happen. Obama won a huge electoral college victory in 2012 with a puny lead on voting day. Obama carried 26 states; Romney 24. It was that close.

There was always going to be false media horserace narrative – there always is. But HRC is still going to clean up. Why?

Polls don’t measure ground game.

She’s got the biggest ground game in political history.

15 Comments

  1. dave constable says:

    I read a story telling me that Wall Street has put over $1.4 billion into this election so far. Most of the donations are from hedge fund companies. That should buy something for Wall Street and the financial industry.

  2. bluegreenblogger says:

    I was hoping to go down South to GOTV, but turns out I can not. Do you know of any phone banks in the Toronto area that can give me a seat? I cannot just do nothing. Uh, Democrat phone banks, to be absolutely clear.

  3. Vancouverois says:

    In 2011, I thought the NDP would have trouble translating its support in Quebec into seats because they didn’t have any ground game. Turned out that they didn’t need it after all.

    • doconnor says:

      The ground game can give you a couple of percent. In the US elect things usually end up close to 50-50 the ground game is often significant.

      In Canada it can be unpredictable which ridings end up being close, so parties do it in all ridings they are competitive in.

      • bluegreenblogger says:

        The ground game can have a huge influence, far more than a couple percent in some cases. The first Ford Mayoralty campaign is a good example where it was a double digit advantage.

    • The Doctor says:

      True enough, but the Quebec theatre of federal election 2011 was a unique situation with several important elements that are not present for Trump. Layton had very high positive ratings and very low negative ratings. Not so for Trump, to say the least. Also, the NDP pulled that off in Quebec in the context of winning 3-way pluralities in a first-past-the-post Westminster parliamentary voting system, and that’s very different from what Trump needs to pull off. Layton was also a Montreal native son, and Harper and Iggy were not.

    • Charlie says:

      That’s not really a comparable situation.

      The NDP benefitted from a large protest vote consisting of discontent Liberal/BQ Quebecers. They chose to park their vote with a party that was seen as a neutral agent lead by a somewhat endearing leader in Jack Layton.

      The pendulum had swung in the NDP’s direction and GOTV efforts would have been irrelevant in a province where the electoral had chosen to make a point.

      The problem with Trump and the GOP is that he has zero/non-existent ground game in key states where he is neck-in-neck with Clinton. He’s relying entirely on the enthusiasm he perceives in his supporters at his rallies. Though, this is completely undermined by the “rigged election” rhetoric he’s been pushing and actually just suppresses his own vote.

      It would be a different situation if Trump was ahead by 15 or 20 points in the polls, but he’s often trailing Clinton in support. So the next skirmish is on the GOTV front and if Clinton volunteers can get 100 more not-so-enthusiastic voters to the polls than Trump, then he’s lost.

      Having said that, I do think there is much more passion on the GOP side than the Dem side, so some Trump supporters need a little less encouraging to cast their ballots. I’m not willing to bet any money on any candidate despite the election preparedness edge that Clinton has.

    • Ronald O'Dowd says:

      Vancouverois,

      Group-think was the order of the day – – in that election.

  4. Ronald O'Dowd says:

    Warren,

    I will concede two points: Team Hillary has had the living shit scared right out of them so, that should make their GOTV even more effective.

    Two: she has the better negatives so one would expect that to also be an advantage.

  5. Russ says:

    To those that are not involved in the political process, the ground game or GOTV is an after thought and a mystery. To those in the game it is the only thing that counts. All that door knocking, phone banking, social media…. is only there to identify the vote so it can be delivered. One of the keys to the Harper victories was the well funded and effective Tory machine. It takes money (sometimes called the “Mother’s Milk of Politics) and dedicated volunteers. That is Hilary’s path to victory

  6. Jean A Paterson says:

    WK is correct for sure. Get Out the Vote is critical. It is probably less scary to knock on the door of a Clinton supporter than of a Trump supporter, who is always enraged about life…and possibly armed.

Leave a Reply to bluegreenblogger Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published.