Clinton Builds General Election Team

NBC News: “In yet another sign Hillary Clinton is looking past rival Bernie Sanders and on to a general election against Donald Trump, the former secretary of state is adding and promoting staff at her national headquarters in New York. A Clinton campaign official said the Democratic frontrunner is not giving up in the remaining primary states, but is increasingly shifting her focus toward beating Trump in November.”

FavoriteLoadingSave to Favorites
Tweet about this on TwitterShare on FacebookShare on LinkedInEmail this to someone
  • bentonf

    Presidential elections occurring during the Year of the Monkey (1968, 1980, 1992, 2004) are frequently tumultuous, and almost never boring.

    Hillary’s take down of Ronald Drumpf just might prove to be spectacular.

    • Mark_in_VA

      Maybe that explains my nutty life? I was born year of the monkey.

      • bentonf

        Every Monkey-born individual I’ve ever met (including my older brother) is sharp as a tack, very clever and hysterically funny! The capacity for good-natured mischief, however, is epic and legendary. πŸ™‚

        • Mark_in_VA

          Flattery will get you everywhere πŸ™‚

        • Larry McD

          Have we met?

        • AG

          I was born in 1980 and I don’t think I fall into any of those descriptions sadly… πŸ™

          • bentonf

            A late bloomer, perhaps? It’s in there someone… πŸ™‚

      • AKRebel

        Me too πŸ™‚

      • Me too.

    • Shamman

      God, I hope so!

  • S1AMER

    It’s a damned shame she has to take time and attention and funds away from winning in November to deal with Sanders.

    • Kyle

      I doubt she will refocus to much energy over the next couple weeks, as Bernie only benefits if she engages with him. She will likely just let him cash his ~ 50 or so delegates over the next few weeks while they keep building for California and Trump in the general.

    • Larry McD

      She doesn’t.

    • MYMY

      She has apparently stopped spending in the remainder of the primaries. She spent nothing on Indiana’s while Sanders spent millions to gain his three or four delegates more than hers.

  • politicsjunkie

    I’m with her!

  • oldhandatthis

    Hillary may not be attacking Bernie or calling for him to suspend his campaign, but by publicly reorganizing her campaign staff for a general election she seems to be leaving Bernie in the dust.

    • southerndemnut

      At this point, there is no real contest left. Even though Sanders won Indiana, Clinton is now at 2,205 out of 2,383 needed to clinch. That will likely occur after the remaining states in May even before California. 538 did a study that showed Bernie would have to beat Hillary by 31 points in California plus beat her by similar margins in the remaining states to pull ahead of her in pledged. Clinton will still appear in states like California that remain but her tone and speeches will be directed to Trump.

  • MYMY

    Go, Hillary!!

  • southerndemnut

    I am worried about the year of the 20s. Every president since 1840 that was elected in an 00 year had tragedy befall them. Every president elected from 1840-1960 died in office. Reagan was assassinated in 1981 and W dealt with 9/11. Some speculate that the plane that was felled over PA was meant for the White House (although Bush was in Florida at the time). Whomever is elected in 2020 could have tragedy befall them. Of course it is just speculation and superstition but its an interesting coincidence.

    • emblaze

      You meant to say someone attempted to assassinate Reagan. I think the fortunate failure of that attempt broke the streak. That’s just science.

    • WADE_NYC

      I’m a Taurus with Sagittarius rising.

    • teddyeo

      On the contrary, 9/11 was not a tragedy that ‘befell Bush.’

      Bush was a tragedy that befell us.

    • One could argue that Reagan surviving the assassination attempt broke the curse. In every previous example, the President died. Had John Hinkley succeeded in killing Reagan and had the 9/11 hijackers successfully hit the White House while Bush was present, killing him, I might given it a second thought. But I can’t put 9/11 in the same ballpark when Bush was several states away at the time. If the curse was ever real and not just a statistical coincidence, I think it’s been broken.

      • Cedric

        Yeah I think Reagan and Bush signs the curse is over.

    • L’Homme ArmΓ©

      It’s an intriguing pattern, but when you look further it’s not actually surprising. In the history of the country there have been 43 presidents (if we don’t count Cleveland twice). Of those, 20 have either died or been the target of an unsuccessful assassination attempt while in office. If you look only at those elected in a year ending in zero, then there are eleven such presidents with eight of them either dying or being targeted. Given the fact that there’s almost a 50% chance of a randomly chosen president being in one of those groups, the fact that eight out of eleven in a particular pattern fall into one of those two groups is unusual but far from strange.

      (For those wondering, here’s the list. I’ve underlined those who died in office; italicized those who were targeted while president but survived their terms; and put those elected in years ending in zero in all-caps. There are also some presidents who were the target of an unsuccessful assassination attempt either before or after being president; I have marked them with an asterisk.

      Washington, J. Adams, Jefferson, Madison, MONROE, J.Q. Adams, Jackson, Van Buren, W. HARRISON, Tyler, Polk, Taylor, Fillmore, Pierce, Buchanan, LINCOLN, A. Johnson, Grant, Hayes, GARFIELD, Arthur, Cleveland, B. Harrison, MCKINLEY, T. Roosevelt*, Taft, Wilson, HARDING, Coolidge, Hoover*, F. ROOSEVELT, Truman, Eisenhower, KENNEDY, L. Johnson, Nixon, Ford, Carter, REAGAN, G. Bush*, Clinton, G.W. BUSH, Obama.)

  • CaptainCommonsense
    • southerndemnut

      That is awfully generous to Trump, but Cook has always been conservative (in terms of picking winners in states).

      • CaptainCommonsense

        I particularly like Arizona and Georgia already being down to just “Leans Republican”.

      • Right, conservative as in “cautious” in this sense. I’m amazed that he starts with Democrats having over 300 electoral votes. I’ve never seen him start with either party having even 270.

        • southerndemnut

          Well I think even for Charlie Cook, at this point at least, it would be simply untenable to argue that the race is viable for Trump. We shall see over the next 6 months but unless something big happens, it will be difficult for to put enough states in play to bring down Clinton’s Solid and Leaning states below 270. It would require a fundamental shift of voter attitudes in those states that have been cemented since at least 1992.

    • ralph_wiggam

      Why do they keep putting Ohio and NH as tossups? At least they didnt include WI and PA in that category this time. I prefer Larry Sabato.

      http://www.centerforpolitics.org/crystalball/content/images//2016_03_31_pres.png

      • southerndemnut

        Sabato’s map seems to be more in line with the state of the race as many people feel at the current moment. Given Trump’s poor performance in the Wisconsin primary last month, I am hard pressed to see him gaining any traction in the state this November. Given the last time a Republican won Wisconsin was in 1984, it seems fitting that is would be likely Democratic.

        I think Nevada might be on the cusp of leaning/likely especially if you consider that the Hispanic vote may rise in this election given Trump and his extreme negative standing in that community.

        The same goes for New Hampshire, although not for the Hispanic vote but rather that, despite Trump winning a plurality of the state in the primary, it is difficult for me to imagine that state, which values its independence but its not socially/culturally reactionary, to be competitive for Trump.

        Virginia probably is also on the cusp of the lean/likely category considering it will likely start of coming very close to matching the overall popular vote margin, but Trump may be weak enough in the NoVa area with soft Republicans and Independents that it could drag his % down to where VA actually over votes the national average.

        I tend to think Florida is going to be tough for Trump because of the Hispanic vote. It will likely rise to at least 20% of the overall statewide vote and he will likely do worse than Romney did. Unless he can obtain an extra 15% of the white male vote, his take in the state will probably slip. North Carolina could potentially be a unique situation for reasons I outlined in a comment below.

        Ohio perhaps is the one state where Trump’s message could perhaps potentially resonate if he can connect with the historically Democratic leaning blue collar vote that is concentrated along the Ohio Turnpike that stretches from Toledo to Youngstown. However, Clinton managed to do better than expected in her primary in March especially in those areas and that leads me to believe that Democratic defections may be diminished come November. Granted it was Kasich’s home state, but Trump did rather poorly in the primary among most GOP demographics and if he loses any soft GOP and Independent vote, we are probably looking at another 5-7% victory for Clinton at least. It will be interesting to see what Kasich does with Trump, assuming he is not the VP. A perfunctory party endorsement of Trump, in the style of others that offered such in the last couple of days, may leave Ohio as something of an “open state” in the sense that Trump with sink or swim on his own without Kasich machinery.

        I think the key demographic to watch this election is Hispanics. Even without Trump as the nominee, the continued rise of Hispanics as a percentage of the electorate and their significant bias towards the Democrats have put the Republicans at a disadvantage. Romney certain did the party no favors in 2012, but Trump is in a different league. If Trump does not significantly alter his attitudes towards that group and continues to harp about building “the wall,” he could potentially shut the GOP out of that vote for a generation. The Democrats, and the Clinton campaign, would be wise to spend significant resources in GOTV and outreach in the community to boost registration and turnout. Hispanic registration and turnout has always lagged compared to other groups and will become an area of significant potential for additional votes.

  • as much as she doens’t need to to win the nod, i kinda hope she puts maybe just a little effort into NJ and CA.

    she doesn’t need to win them. but it wouldn’t hurt to take some of the wind out of sanders’ sails.

    • Cedric

      New polls out have her crushing Bernie in CA and NJ. And two new national polls have her lead increasing back to double digits. Democrats are beginning the wrap this up and I think the Trump coronation is only helping things.

  • mhandrh

    In addition to the old, wizened experienced pols who know how to run campaigns, influence polls, and play the news cycles, she NEEDS young blood, idealists, persons who can get younger voters, Bernie supporters and such to come to her ad she needs to heed them..