Some Team Biden Members Always Believed That Biden Knew What He Was Doing

There is an interesting posting by DU's own Celerity entitled "Iowa Was Meaningless" which one can read here:

https://www.democraticunderground.com/1287701972]

The full title of this NYTimes piece is:

Iowa Was Meaningless
We spent a lot of time covering the candidates’ ups and downs in Iowa. Almost none of it mattered.

This article was written by Reid J. Epstein. Yes, a whole lot of reporters, talking heads, and analysts, such as the people at fivethirtyeight.com all thought that Iowa was so damn important. Do you know who never thought it was so damn important? Joe Biden's campaign did not think it was so important, and neither did I.

During the year 2019, people like Mayor Pete Buttigieg, Senator Bernie Sanders, and Senator Elizabeth Warren all spent a huge amount of time in Iowa, and they all spent a lot of money building up a big organization. Joe Biden did not. Joe Biden kept saying that South Carolina was his firewall. Some people noticed that he was strong with African Americans--but they also kept saying how important Iowa and New Hampshire was. In January 2020, Team 538 was saying that if Joe Biden could just win Iowa, he'd have an 80% chance to win the nomination. They also said if someone else won Iowa, they would be the most likely to win the nomination. So, most of the talking heads were focused on Iowa.

So, why was Joe Biden so focused on South Carolina, and not Iowa? Sure, Biden ended up doing a bus tour of Iowa, but only about a month before the election, and only because people started screaming at him that if he did not win Iowa he would have no chance. The key is that Biden knew what Jimmy Carter, Bill Clinton, and Barack Obama knew. You remember those guys--the last three Democrats to win the Presidency. These guys knew it was not so much about Iowa--it was more about the South. How did these guys know that? Because they each studied what had happened in previous Democratic Presidential Primaries, and they each built their campaigns around the South. Barack Obama, for example, noticed that Carter swept the South and then got the nomination. He also noticed that Bill Clinton did the same thing. When Joe Biden joined Team Obama in 2008, do you think that someone on Obama's team might have clued Biden in on how Obama won the nomination in 2008? I bet someone did.

At this point, I am going to plagiarize myself, and post what I posted here on this site January 10th, about 3 weeks before Iowa--when so many reporters were so obsessed with Iowa. (you can see the original comment here https://upload.democraticunderground.com/1287416957#post13] :

It isn't really about Just Iowa and New Hampshire. The South is huge.

If a Democrat wins Iowa and/or New Hampshire, but does not do really well in the South, he often loses in the general election. That's because in order to do really well in the South, you have to have the Black vote. When Democrats do not have a strong enough support in the South, they often lose the election.

Carter and Clinton were both Southerners who killed in the South, and they both won in the General Election. Clinton didn't win either Iowa or New Hampshire, but that did not matter--he still won the nomation because of his big support in the South. Obama wasn't from the South, but he was Black, so he killed in the South too.

Do you know the last time the Democrats won a General Election with a liberal from New England? It was JFK in 1960, and that was before the Voting Rights Act was passed. After that happened, the racist White Democratic Dixiecrats fled the Democratic Party and became Republicans. Because of that, Nixon invoked his "Southern Strategy" in 1968 and the Republicans have been invoking it ever since. If the Democrats end up putting forth a nominee who is not really strong in the South, there is a good chance that that nominee will lose in the general. Fortunately, Biden is leading the polls nationwide and is very strong in the South.

In 1984, Walter Mondale won the nomination, but the only Southern state that he won in the primary was Florida. Most of the other Southern states were won by Gary Hart, with a few also being won by Jesse Jackson. Mondale got creamed in the General Election.

In 1988, Michael Dukakis only won Texas and Florida in the Primary. The other Southern states were won by Al Gore and Jesse Jackson. Dukakis lost in the General as well.

People are worrying a lot this year about exciting the youth vote when historically, exciting the black vote has been much more important. Hillary won a lot of the Southern States, but she still didn't get enough of the Black Vote--whether that was from voter suppression, or Russian dirty tricks, or whatever.

Do you know why Biden's strongest supporters are older Americans? Because a lot of us have watched all of these Presidential races, and we know what happened to folks like Michael Dukakis. The last thing we want to run is a White very Liberal guy from New England. We have been there, done that. At least Elizabeth Warren is a woman, and that could help balance things out. But a white very liberal guy from New England who is not really strong with Black support? To many of us Biden supporters, it is electoral suicide.

"OK, sloumeau", you may be saying to yourself, "that's just one comment. How do we really know that you were sure that this was going to work?" Here's a comment from me 3 days later, on January 13: https://www.democraticunderground.com/1287420082#post3]

Fivethirtyeight.com covers this.

If someone goes to the following link...

https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2020-primary-forecast/iowa/

Fivethiryeight.com talks about how winning Iowa raises or lowers the odds of winning the nomination.

Basically, they say that winning Iowa means the person has an 80% chance of winning the nomination. Why can't they say 100%? Because of people like Bill Clinton who did not win either Iowa or New Hamshire but still won the nomination. How did he do it? Well, Bill Clinton was from the South, and he swept the South. This means, even if you don't win Iowa or New Hampshire, you can still win if you do well in the South. Anyone doing strong in the South? Oh, you, Joe Biden? OK, so even if Joe Biden doesn't win Iowa and New Hampshire he can still win by doing well in the South.

"OK, sloumeau", you might be saying to yourself, "maybe you just got lucky there. I am still not sure that you knew Biden could win by sweeping the South and did not have to win Iowa and New Hamsphire to win". OK, here's another comment I made from that same posting:

The following link should help you with that.

Check out this link:

https://www.npr.org/2016/01/31/465016222/how-predictive-are-iowa-and-new-hampshire

It shows who won Iowa and New Hampshire, both Democrats and Republicans since 1976. The winners are shown in two, easy to read images.

Notice that the following people won both Iowa and New Hampshire since 1976 and they all went on to win the nomination. Fifty percent of the time, they also went on to win the General Election:

1976: Carter won both--Got Nomination--Won General
1980: Carter won both--Got Nomination--Lost General
1996: Clinton won both--Got Nomination--Won General
2000: Gore won both--Got Nomination--Lost General
2004: Kerry won both--Got Nomination--Lost General
2012: Obama won both--Got Nomination--Won General

The following people won either Iowa or New Hampshire and then got the nomination. One out of three times, they went on to win the General Election:

1984: Mondale won in Iowa--Got Nomination--Lost General
1988: Dukakis won in 1988--Got Nomination--Lost General
2008: Obama won in Iowa--Got Nomination--Won General

Since 1976, the following people won neither Iowa or New Hampshire but still went on to win the Nomination and the General Election:

1992: Bill Clinton lost both--Got Nomination--Won General


So, what does that tell me? Based on the past, if anyone wins both Iowa and New Hampshire, their odds of winning the Nomination are quite good. If, however, two different people win Iowa and New Hampshire, The odds of one of those two people *combined* winning the nomination is probably in about the 75% to 80% range. This means that each of the two winners' individual chances of winning the nomination might be around 40%.

Here's where it gets tricky. If those two winners are facing someone who is strong in the South, like Joe Biden is, and if that person sweeps the South, that person can override their two wins. Just as Bill Clinton was the Southern exception in 1992, Joe Biden could be the Southern exception in 2020. It means that if Joe Biden does not win Iowa or New Hamshire, he still has a shot at winning, albeit maybe about a 20% chance of winning. However, if he does really well in the South, as could happen, he could very well do it.

Here is me again on January 28: https://www.democraticunderground.com/1287452636#post4]

4. If Bernie fails to do well in Iowa and NH, he is toast.

Bernie still has a steep climb ahead.

1. Biden might sweep the South as Hillary did.

2. There are 11 closed primaries. Since a lot of Bernie's support seems to come from non-Democrats, he tends to do worse in closed primaries. In 2016, Sanders lost every closed primary.

So, did anyone else here at DU realize this? Scurrilous knew: https://www.democraticunderground.com/1287490459#post110]

How did NH propel Clinton?


He didn't win a primary until Georgia, number 6. That was a slow propel. In fact his percentage went down the next two primaries. He won GA because he swept the south. Like Biden is going to do.

And you're forgetting '72 McGovern. Muskie won Iowa and NH.


Gotta go. I'll be back in AM.

Scurrilous said that on February 9, 2020--after Iowa. He knew that Iowa was not essential--even after Biden came in what...fourth in Iowa?

So, next time people say, "Nobody could have predicted what happened with Biden", remember that Biden and his team knew, I knew, and Scurrilous knew. In fact, Probably a whole lot of other people on Team Biden here at DU knew. So, next time the pundits want to know the scoop, they should just pay DU a visit. We know the score because we do our homework.