Ramira
November 10, 2016, 3:45pm
43
The USA has made a really terrible choice. Frighteningly terrible. But it was a choice, on a scale of 0 to 10, between a zero and a 5.
What I won’t buy into is the notion Bernie Sanders would have won; Sanders, in my honest opinion, would have been an equally weak candidate, and would almost certainly have lost, albeit perhaps with a different-looking map. What happened, at least in my opinion, is that the Democrats anointed Clinton the nominee so long ago no talented politician wanted to run against her, and the only person willing to do so was the not-really-a-Democrat socialist outsider who didn’t have any loyalty to the party anyway and so had little to lose.
Given how terrible Trump’s Presidency will be, you better believe a lot of Democrats are already planning their next 2-3 years to take a run at him. By the time the primary process gets underway, the economy will likely be a disaster and Trump may face a significant challenge in the GOP primary. It’ll be like 2008, a White House ripe for the taking.
To look at the numbers that (cited in the pit thread ) they say clearly that it was her failure of charisma, the demotivation of the “voters of Obama” and not a gain by Trump.
I said
Yes it seems that if there is one solid and not deniable criticism of her, it is indeed the blindness and the false sense of a destiny although if she had been able to listen to criticism she should have known that she was not the vehicle and that her skills and her role was to play an eminence grise in the future to support some charismatic candidate.
The numbers from this article, It Appears As Though Hillary Clinton Was Ultimately Done In By Low Democratic Voter Turnout , which is showing the American voting data that you have the confirmation it was indeed the collapse in the enthusiasm and the support of Mrs Clinton’s own party and not an explosion of the support to Trump.
Last night and this morning many seemed to think that the reason Trump won was because angry white voters turned out in large numbers to vote for him. But with nearly all the votes now tallied it appears as though that’s just not the case. In fact, Trump garnered fewer overall votes nationwide than John McCain and Mitt Romney, the past two losing GOP nominees, did in 2008 and 2012. As of this writing, with almost all votes counted, Trump has tallied 59,611,678 votes; Romney pulled in 60,933,504 in 2012, and McCain 59,948,323 in 2008.
By comparison, Hillary’s 59,814,018 votes (which won her the popular vote, but not the Electoral College vote) is considerably less than the 69,498,516 Obama got in 2008, and the 65,915,795 he received in 2012. She was particularly hurt by low turnout in crucial swing states.
Also agraphical presentation of the numbers to show (image file png)
These are numbers that would I think encourage the actually charismatic potential opponent to take heed for they say not that large numbers turned to Trump, but that only there was large demotivation and it seems well understood she was not ever the good campaigner or the charismatic politician who motivates.
even to put this on the dislike of women seems wrong.
