patrick.net

Interesting analysis on Hillary and Lizzie

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xsa7fd3YC7w

He's probably wrong on primaries. He thinks the conventional wisdom that primaries hurt a party is incorrect.

Other than 2008, a hard fought primary can seriously hurt the nominee

If Lizzie ran against Clinton and lost, Hillary would probably lose to the Republican even if its another Bush

1968- Robert Kennedy and McCarthy's challenge to Hubert Humphrey helped sink him against RMNixon
1976-Reagan v Ford -Reagan's pursuit of the nomination to the end hurt Ford in the general election against Carter (as did pardoning Nixon)
1980- Kennedy's spirited campaign against Carter and convention speech, helped defeat Carter
1992- Perot's out of party challenge against GHWB helped elect Clinton
2000-Nader's out of party challenge against Gore helped elect (with the help of the Supreme Court) GWB
2004- Edwards campaign against Kerry did little damage with Kerry himself being the biggest obstacle to getting elected against sitting duck GWB.
2008- Hilllary's challenge against Obama didnt harm Obama but that race was an historic outlier, with Obama capturing the nation's imagination that an African Amerian President was possible.

If Warren runs against Hillary and really attacks her she will harm Clinton's chances in a big way if Hillary survives the primary

If Warren beats Hillary she has a chance, just as if Reagan won in 76 or Kennedy in 80- both challengers probably would have had a better chance of getting elected than their party's ultimate nominees.

If you are going to challenge the presumptive nominee you have to run to win, not just to influence the candidate.

#politics