Clinton was not going to get Obama's numbers with blacks, nor do I remember anyone ever expecting her to. That said, this article overstates the difference in support between the two in one breath while pointing out she's receiving relatively the same amount of support in the other. It seems to be criticizing her for only getting Barack's numbers while Obama grew support from prior elections?
Me too. Now I don't feel so bad.
Is "Clinton Die-Hards" the new term for the millions of people who voted for her over Bernard Sanders?
Pretty obvious bait.
Post like these make no sense. On polifact.org it has Clinton telling the truth more than Obama on avg.
For the past 2-3 decades the black vote has been more or less 85-95% democratic so its not a real shock there, democrats are pretty much coasting on always counting on that block:
The surprise to me is the hispanic and women vote, I would expect that to trend towards Hillary much more favorably and it probably will as we get closer to the elections. Those two groups are the key swing votes for this cycle, I would think, and I just don't see a path for Trump to get much higher in those groups with all the stuff he has said so far.
