Off to the Races

Hillary Clinton Will Win the Nomination, But Then What?

If she runs against a mainstream Republican, her weakness among independents spells trouble.

Hillary Clinton campaigns in Hooksett, N.H.
AP Photo/Matt Rourke
Feb. 11, 2016, 8 p.m.

Hil­lary Clin­ton is fa­cing a myri­ad of chal­lenges in her bid to be­come pres­id­ent, but los­ing the Demo­crat­ic nom­in­a­tion to Bernie Sanders is not one. Iron­ic­ally while Clin­ton was widely con­sidered to be far to the left of her hus­band’s Ad­min­is­tra­tion, she is now fa­cing a party that has moved strongly to her left. Sanders is cap­tur­ing the ima­gin­a­tion and pas­sions of not just the left but young­er, more ideal­ist­ic voters. He is the new, shiny ob­ject (though six years older than Clin­ton), prom­ising an ideal­ist­ic world with no col­lege tu­ition and Medi­care for all. Good luck try­ing to ex­plain to his fans that Sanders’s pro­pos­als are totally un­real­ist­ic and fin­an­cially un­ten­able.

But hav­ing said all of that, and no mat­ter what happened in Iowa and New Hamp­shire, Sanders is not go­ing to be the Demo­crat­ic nom­in­ee. He fought Clin­ton to a vir­tu­al tie Iowa and will likely do com­par­ably well in most of the oth­er 14 caucus states. The caucus pro­cess in­her­ently fa­vors strongly ideo­lo­gic­al can­did­ates be­cause they have the most pas­sion­ate sup­port­ers. After all, few nor­mal people both­er to at­tend caucuses in Iowa or any­where else, as a com­par­is­on of turnout in caucuses and elec­tions shows.

Sanders won New Hamp­shire by a huge mar­gin and will likely win most if not all of the oth­er five New Eng­land states (Maine is a caucus state). But it is worth re­mem­ber­ing that the states with caucuses tend to be small. Col­or­ado, Min­nesota, Wash­ing­ton state and Iowa are the largest. New Eng­land states are small as well; Mas­sachu­setts is the only state in the re­gion of any real size. Put it all to­geth­er, as my col­league Dav­id Wasser­man has poin­ted out, a can­did­ate win­ning 100 per­cent of all caucus and New Eng­land del­eg­ates would still only have 36 per­cent of the del­eg­ates needed to win the Demo­crat­ic nom­in­a­tion.

While there is ob­vi­ously no na­tion­al Demo­crat­ic primary, the na­tion­al polls do give an in­dic­at­or of what is down the road. A re­cent Quin­nipi­ac Uni­versity poll, which showed Clin­ton’s na­tion­al ad­vant­age over Sanders down to 44 to 42 per­cent, got a great deal of me­dia cov­er­age. But it should be poin­ted out that she leads widely in polls taken since the first of the year by large news or­gan­iz­a­tions: ABC News/Wash­ing­ton Post (+19), CBS/New York Times (+7), CNN (+14), Fox (+12) and NBC/Wall Street Journ­al (+25).

On March 1, Sanders will likely win Mas­sachu­setts and Ver­mont. The Col­or­ado and Min­nesota caucuses will prob­ably be close, but give Sanders the ad­vant­age. The out­look is less pro­pi­tious for him in the Alabama, Arkan­sas, Geor­gia, Ok­lahoma, Ten­ness­ee, and Vir­gin­ia primar­ies.

Then there are su­per del­eg­ates, in oth­er words, the es­tab­lish­ment. All con­gress­men, sen­at­ors, gov­ernors, state chairs and na­tion­al com­mit­tee mem­bers are su­per del­eg­ates, and very few sup­port Sanders. The cur­rent su­per del­eg­ate count is 362 for Clin­ton to eight for Sanders, with 342 out­stand­ing. In short, it’s tough to see Sanders win­ning 2,383 del­eg­ates, which is a ma­jor­ity of the 4,764 who can vote at the con­ven­tion.

What should be more con­cern­ing for Clin­ton back­ers is the gen­er­al elec­tion.

Demo­crats and lib­er­als are not her prob­lem. In the Janu­ary NBC News/Wall Street Journ­al na­tion­al poll, Clin­ton was viewed pos­it­ively by 71 per­cent of Demo­crats, neut­rally by 15 per­cent and neg­at­ively by 14 per­cent, a net plus of 57 points.   Among lib­er­als, 65 per­cent have a pos­it­ive im­pres­sion of her, 10 per­cent were neut­ral, and 25 per­cent were neg­at­ive, a net plus of 40 points.  

Pre­dict­ably just sev­en per­cent of Re­pub­lic­ans view Clin­ton pos­it­ively, five per­cent have neut­ral feel­ings, 88 per­cent see her neg­at­ively, a net minus of 81 points. Sim­il­arly, 16 per­cent of con­ser­vat­ives have pos­it­ive feel­ings to­ward her, sev­en per­cent were neut­ral, and 76 per­cent were neg­at­ive, a net minus of 60 points.

That leaves in­de­pend­ents and mod­er­ates. She is in big trouble with in­de­pend­ents. Just of 35 per­cent had a pos­it­ive view of her, 11 per­cent were neut­ral, and whop­ping 54 per­cent were neg­at­ive, a net minus of 19 points. Mod­er­ates were 44 per­cent pos­it­ive, 13 per­cent neut­ral, and 43 per­cent neg­at­ive, a net plus of one point, well with­in the mar­gin of er­ror. By com­par­is­on, in the last gen­er­al elec­tion, Obama lost in­de­pend­ents by five points but won mod­er­ates by 15 points.

So how would Clin­ton do in the gen­er­al elec­tion.  An old joke comes to mind. A wo­man is asked how her hus­band is, and she replies, “com­pared to what.”  The an­swer to how would Clin­ton do in the gen­er­al elec­tion comes down to “com­pared to whom.”  Against a non-po­lar­iz­ing Re­pub­lic­an, Clin­ton would have a real chal­lenge with in­de­pend­ents and mod­er­ates.  Against a highly con­tro­ver­sial Re­pub­lic­an, it might be more of a fair fight.  

In con­ver­sa­tions with Demo­crats, I found them gravely con­cerned about the gen­er­al elec­tion be­cause of the di­vi­sions in their party. In sim­il­ar talks with Re­pub­lic­ans, who are also frag­men­ted, I found them really wor­ried about Novem­ber as well. The truth is, each side has a lot to worry about.

What We're Following See More »
Trump Signs Border Deal
1 weeks ago

"President Trump signed a sweeping spending bill Friday afternoon, averting another partial government shutdown. The action came after Trump had declared a national emergency in a move designed to circumvent Congress and build additional barriers at the southern border, where he said the United States faces 'an invasion of our country.'"

Trump Declares National Emergency
1 weeks ago

"President Donald Trump on Friday declared a state of emergency on the southern border and immediately direct $8 billion to construct or repair as many as 234 miles of a border barrier. The move — which is sure to invite vigorous legal challenges from activists and government officials — comes after Trump failed to get the $5.7 billion he was seeking from lawmakers. Instead, Trump agreed to sign a deal that included just $1.375 for border security."

House Will Condemn Emergency Declaration
1 weeks ago

"House Democrats are gearing up to pass a joint resolution disapproving of President Trump’s emergency declaration to build his U.S.-Mexico border wall, a move that will force Senate Republicans to vote on a contentious issue that divides their party. House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerrold Nadler (D-N.Y.) said Thursday evening in an interview with The Washington Post that the House would take up the resolution in the coming days or weeks. The measure is expected to easily clear the Democratic-led House, and because it would be privileged, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) would be forced to put the resolution to a vote that he could lose."

Where Will the Emergency Money Come From?
1 weeks ago

"ABC News has learned the president plans to announce on Friday his intention to spend about $8 billion on the border wall with a mix of spending from Congressional appropriations approved Thursday night, executive action and an emergency declaration. A senior White House official familiar with the plan told ABC News that $1.375 billion would come from the spending bill Congress passed Thursday; $600 million would come from the Treasury Department's drug forfeiture fund; $2.5 billion would come from the Pentagon's drug interdiction program; and through an emergency declaration: $3.5 billion from the Pentagon's military construction budget."

House Passes Funding Deal
1 weeks ago

"The House passed a massive border and budget bill that would avert a shutdown and keep the government funded through the end of September. The Senate passed the measure earlier Thursday. The bill provides $1.375 billion for fences, far short of the $5.7 billion President Trump had demanded to fund steel walls. But the president says he will sign the legislation, and instead seek to fund his border wall by declaring a national emergency."


Welcome to National Journal!

You are currently accessing National Journal from IP access. Please login to access this feature. If you have any questions, please contact your Dedicated Advisor.