# Hillary 2020 **URL:** \ **Category:** Politics & Elections\ **Created:** [July 14, 2018, 12:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hillary-2020/817873 "2018-07-14T00:42:05Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 1\ **Page:** 7
**Author:** ![Banquet\_Bear](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/banquet_bear/32/373_2.png) [@Banquet\_Bear](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Banquet_Bear)\ **Post date:** [July 20, 2018, 5:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hillary-2020/817873/121 "2018-07-20T05:22:18Z")
> [@Thing\_Fish](#): > > What do you mean, a “single data point”? …it means what I said. > [@](#): > > What “statistical outlier”? “Hillary Clinton and Donald J. Trump head into the presidential race with the worst favorable ratings of any presumed Democratic or Republican nominee **in decades**.” > **[Clinton and Trump Have Terrible Approval Ratings. Does It Matter? (Published...](https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/06/03/us/elections/trump-and-clinton-favorability.html)** > > Hillary Clinton and Donald J. Trump head into the presidential race with the worst favorable ratings of any presumed nominee in decades. > [@](#): > > Can you show me a single poll from 2016 that showed Clinton with a positive net approval? I don’t need too. > [@](#): > > Do you even know what net approval is? Yep. > [@](#): > > Once again: that means that MOST AMERICANS DISLIKE HER. Net approval rating measures, get this, this may shock you, but it measures **approval**. I might like someone, but not approve of their actions. So if you want to measure likability, then show me the polls that measure that. > [@](#): > > The only reason she came close to winning is that Trump was even more unpopular. Any normal Republican would have won in a landslide. This doesn’t make any sense. Trump destroyed every single Republican. They didn’t even really come close. You can’t pretend this was a normal election. There is no basis to predict that “Any normal Republican would have won in a landslide.” Nothing at all. > [@](#): > > I mean, what part of “Don’t nominate someone who most people don’t like” do you not understand? What part of the Democratic Primary process do you not understand? > [@](#): > > I realize you and millions of other people really like her, but you’re in a minority. You are missing the point. I really don’t care to re litigate what happened in the last election. But you really need to understand exactly what happened. Your country got fucked. It got fucked by the Russians. It got fucked by the social media companies, that turned over data to people who used it in ways that it shouldn’t have who used it to devastating effect. It got fucked again by the social media companies who took a “hands-off” approach to content, allowing people to curate their own feedback loops to supply themselves with constant 24 hour propaganda. It got fucked by the electoral college, a stupid ridiculous antiquated system that has no place in a modern democracy. It got fucked by the so-called “main-stream-media”, which decided that both Trump and Clinton were “equally as bad” so it made it look like “Hillary’s emails” were as bad if not worse of a scandal than “grab them by the p#$sy” or Trumps connections to Russia. It got fucked by the main-stream-media again who had the Steele Dossier story in their hands months before the election but decided not to publish. It got fucked by Comey who considered that it was his duty to release information about Hillary’s emails just before the election but didn’t release any of the Trump/Russia story. And I could go on and on and on. We are still learning stuff. Like the Illinois database hacks. It will be years before we know everything. Stop pretending this was all about people “not liking Clinton.” It was so much more than that. If Sanders had run he would have had to deal with all of the above as well and worse. America has never seen anything like this before in the history of the country. **And you are still under attack**. The article cited in the OP is just part of the process. Learn to recognize it. Don’t be part of the problem. > [@](#): > > This is not my opinion, I think it is. > [@](#): > > [this is objective fact](https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/clinton_favorableunfavorable-113). “Page Not Found” > [@](#): > > Clinton wasn’t “very likely” to win the election. She was if we used your metric. > [@](#): > > On election day, 538 had her winning the popular vote by 3 points, giving her a 2-1 chance of winning. You think having only a 33% chance of electing Trump was good enough? I haven’t argued it was “good enough.” Even if she had a 10-1 chance of winning that wouldn’t be “good enough” if she eventually lost. > [@](#): > > Hypothetical polls consistently showed that Bernie would have beaten Trump by about ten points. Yeah we’ve had this discussion. And if I remember correctly we destroyed these “hypothetical polls.” But if you think you’ve got a point, feel free to cite them again and we will take a look. > [@](#): > > Every other Democrat whose name was polled also outperformed Clinton. Was that the poll you cited once that included names like Sean Spicer and Jared Kushner? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hillary-2020/817873.md?page=6)