She lost. She has never won an election where the skids weren’t greased for her.
I know for a FACT that Hillary loses to Trump, you are guessing that Bernie (who hits a lot of the same populist points that Trump does) would do worse. How many Hillary voters would vote for Trump over Bernie, I think the number is zero)? Once Bernie has the nomination, he gets that 40% of the voters that will vote for anyone with a D next to their name (he is certainly more palatable to Democrats than Trump is to Republicans). Do you think the populist message served on a plate of socialism does better or a populist message served on a plate of pussy grabbing xenophobic bigotry does better?
I agree that Sanders had a better chance against Trump, but it’s impossible to say for sure what effect a socialist in the race would have on moderate Democrats. Plus Sanders would have had even more trouble bringing out minority voters than Clinton did. She at least had a brand that minority voters respected even if the brand wasn’t as good as Obama’s. Sanders had no base among minority voters.
I think Hillary would have done a fine job as President, she’s just not electable.
DC is chock full of people who would make better senators, congressmen and presidents. None of them can get elected.
You aren’t stupid for voting for Hillary. You are stupid for insisting that the reason she lost is because America is racist or that Hillary’s faults were not consequential enough to make her unpalatable to people who might have voted for a different Democratic candidate.
It would be nice if people realize ha the first group was never going to vote for a Demcrat no matter what (that vote has been baked into the Republican vote tally since the southern strategy) and it was the second group that propelled Trump to victory.
It would be nice if people would acknowledge how unpalatable a plutocratic insider who cheated to get the nomination (which she probably would have gotten anyway) is to some of these voters.
This is a great idea, but I don’t think the numbers work on a basic income unless we increase taxes to never before seen levels. I don’t think any of the anti-minimum wage folks would trade the minimum wage for higher taxes like we would need for a basic universal income. So you’ve got a great idea that costs too much and nobody likes.
[quote=“Gyrate, post:518, topic:773291”]
That and the “Gee, could you give me an example of how the opposition smeared Hillary?” question have done it for me too. There is no connection to reality here. I’m throwing in the towel.[/qute]
You should have thrown in the towel a long time ago (your arguments have mostly been “you’re a poopyhead I you don’t like Hillary”) but you have been immune to reason for a while now, you can’t really be expected to exhibit any rationality.
Right because people that disagree with you a either poopyheads or crazy.
The thought is that is that she has been smeared for decades. Which would make you think that those negatives are already baked in. But if that character assassination made her so fucking unelectable that she couldn’t even beat a bobblehead like trump, then why in the world did we nominate her?
Because she insisted it was her turn and insisted that it was time for a woman in the white house. In all the campaign speeches that Obama gave, I don’t recall him ever saying that we ought to vote for him because its time to get some color in the white house. And yet he still managed to get elected, twice, by the racist voters in the swing states that voted for Trump.
There is a large population of voters who will come out to vote and will vote for whoever has a D or R next to their name. Hillary did no better than Kerry and worse than Gore among blacks. Does Hillary have a “brand” outside the black community? Does she have a brand at all that moves the needle during general elections, or just during primaries?
She won the primary, which is what mattered for the Democratic nomination.
The electorate did not vote rationally, therefore you are not any more a good observer of this situation than anyone else.
I don’t know about her ever saying it was her turn. It’s something that came with the situation and the running dialogue, as a cheerleading meme. That you are filled with vitriol about that one aspect to this is pretty ridiculous, when comparing it to the assumptions and presumptions, lies, and wretched scumminess that came from the other side.
After all that the headline you extract is “Hillary is a plutocrat”? Bury the lede much?
On this thread you only answer the people in your mind. They don’t exist.
Hillary was an above average choice. Why the spittle and superiority? You are indistinguishable in your tone from a russian troll.
You mean the one where she got the debate questions and the referees were in the bag for her? THAT primary?
Yes that primary during that election cycle where the other side got a few billion in free media coverage, most of it free of any question or challenge.
D: “We have never had a woman prez before. Let’s go! It’s time!”
R: “Lock her up!” “Hillary for prison!” “Beat the hell out of him! I’ll pay the legal bills!” “I love the poorly educated!” “Where is my african american!” “Blacks, you live in Hell, what the hell have you got to lose!” … () …()…
If you think you got a grip on what just happened you are dreaming. Your lectures are deluded.
Talk about greasing the skids: You are normalizing this as a D failure. You should not normalize this if you believe in democracy.
The handful of debate questions that weren’t actually what was asked?
I am in a position to observe that Hillary lost to a bobblehead. I am in a position to see the excuses coming from the “ready for Hillary” crowd shift from racist America, to disaffected rust belt whites, to Jill Stein to fucking pretty much everything other than “Hillary lost because she is a shitty candidate” She’s not a shitty person but she is a shitty candidate.
You don’t think they voted rationally because Hillary lost. I thought the same thing when Kerry lost. Democracy is messy and sometimes your candidate loses. You can either curse heaven or reflect on why your candidate lost to a bobblehead like Trump.
Vitriol isn’t about her egomaniacal presumptiveness. The vitriol is about the fact that Trump is going to be POTUS because she lost. She lost after cheating in the primary.
The headline I extract is that Hillary is a horrible candidate and we should never have nominated her and we should endeavor not to make this sort of mistake again in the future.
And what of the ones answering me? Do they not exist either?
Or are you saying that I am engaging in straw manning. If so, please tell me how.
Hillary was an above average choice if you ignore all the flaws. Hillary was an above average choice if she didn’t cheat in the primary. Hillary was an above average choice if she didn’t give secret speeches to wall street telling them how awesome they are while telling everyone else, she was going to crack down on them for what they did to our economy, she was an above average choice if she wasn’t such a horrible candidate.
She may be an above average administrator but she was a horrible candidate. And above average candidate doesn’t lose to Trump in the general election. Bernie “a below average candidate” would have beaten Trump. That is how shitty Trump is and Hillary couldn’t even manage THAT because she was too busy running around collecting money in places like NYC and San Francisco’s silicon valley to go to places like Michigan, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, etc. Did she not know about the electoral college system? Somebody really should have told her.
This was a D failure.
Trump is not a political genius.
This country elected a black man twice. The alt right did not elect Trump. Hillary did not lose because America is racist. Hillary did not lose because America is misogynistic. Hillary lost because she is a horrible candidate and Democrats allowed her “ready for Hillary” crowd to coopt the primary process and install her as our nominee.
Wait. Are you saying that because the debate question about Flint Michigan wasn’t word for word the question that was asked, this somehow invalidates the criticism that Hillary was fed debate questions?
And it was only a handful of questions that we know about.
She is a cheater and that calls everything she has done into question. Are we still so sure that the “ready for Hillary” crowd that was willing to stoop to cheating by feeding her debate questions didn’t go beyond mere theoretical sabotage of Bernie Sanders that we saw in the DNC emails? Are we sure that the non-state department related emails that Hillary deleted didn’t contain some scandalous emails with Debbie Wasserman Schultz strategizing about how to winnow the primary field so that she would have little to no opposition during the primary? After all, Is there any doubt that a Republican primary with Trump and only one or two other Republicans from the beginning would not have given Trump the ability to split the Republican vote among several relatively fungible candidates?
The bottom line on that particular criticism is that she cheated and for a lot of people who supported bernie, its unforgivable. I personally had a hard time pulling the lever for her because of this.
Brazile said the Flint lady would ask about aid to victims. She actually asked about getting rid of lead pipes around the US. Not the same thing.
So, if a friend told me some test questions before class, that makes me a horrible cheater who should be expelled? If I have a job interview, and my buddy at the company tells me what they’re likely to ask, I should never again be hired for anything more responsible than burger flipper? Because the question thing falls somewhere in between there in terms of evil. If Clinton knew about this at the time - and these weren’t her emails, remember - she probably should’ve said something to others involved in planning the debate. Hell, maybe she did and that’s why they were different. There’s just as much evidence for that theory as there is for your Evil Overlord Clinton one.
You’re still normalizing which I think is dangerous.
It’s a very unusual cycle, with lots of undercurrents, especially since we just had 8 years of a black president, but you don’t want to explore anything else other than this, which I think is pretty unremarkable in comparison.