All the “It’s Clinton’s fault that Trump won” nonsense is the same breastbeating that the Republicans went through in 2008 and 2012. “There’s nothing wrong with our platform or our understanding of what the populace wants - the problem is that we didn’t nominate a pure enough candidate! But next time…”
The problem with the Democrats isn’t that they nominated Hillary. It’s that they assumed most Americans were as repulsed by Trump as they were. And if they don’t take the time to consider why Trump appealed to so many people - and figure out either how to co-opt it or counter it - they’ll lose the next few elections as well.
But it does mean that the people who did vote for Trump have to take responsibility for his presidency. You bought that horse and you’d better be able to ride it home, bitches.
I think we’re going too hard on the Trump voters, may of whom are righteous well-intentioned people just too stupid or ignorant to vote rationally.
However the Republicans who absurdly deflect the blame for Trump’s elections onto Democrats are annoying.
It’s as though they’re saying “We’re too stupid to do anything but pull the (R) lever. We needed the D’s to save us from ourselves.” This may be valid for the Republican base, who really are that stupid, but what about the (R) leaders who were happy to turn the keys to the Nation over to the short-fingered sociopath for venal partisan reasons?
You’re not from around here? Just look at their names:
Colin Powell (R)
Hillary Clinton (D)
Pay special attention to the parentheticals. (If needed, select the Zoom option from the Chrome menu.) Yes, it really is no more complicated than that.
But if we want to talk about unhinged, mentally undeveloped, spoiled, narcissistic sociopaths, who don’t know anything and are proud of that, and who can’t seem to finish ONE thought or sentence, then Trump is your boy.
He appealed because he’s a bigoted, psychopathic liar, and that’s what his supporters wanted. Even if the Democrats could win by running like someone like that, it would be pointless; “winning” by turning into the other side is just losing by another name.
Mainly, the Democrats lost because their base stayed home. And *that *largely happened because the Democrats were so deferential to the Republicans, refusing to call the Republicans out on their blatant bigotry and condemning their own candidate when she made small gestures in that direction. So the people who might otherwise have supported them stayed home, since they didn’t see any reason to vote for people who put the feelings of white bigots over their own lives and freedom.
That narrative is not necessarily true. hHw much is the pro-Clinton margin in the popular vote so far? 2 million? And they aren’t all counted yet? And then there are registration/election/etc irregularities which have recently triggered calls for an audit of the election.
They’ve got the lawyers, guns and money, it will stand. And things are going to get a lot tougher for a lot of people. A lot of people. Gonna have to focus on how to help them get through, which means begging the Forces of Darkness for whatever table scraps we can.
Course, the more the Trumpiviks screw the pooch, publicly and loudly, the more they will start to get nervous and glancing at the calender. We need to gently encourage them in this burgeoning enlightenment. Threats come later.
That’s rationalization for not releasing the contents of the speeches. Noone buys it but people who are already inclined to overlook pretty much everything that Hillary did wrong.
If the contents really don’t matter why does the availability of the contents of last year’s speech matter? She isn’t recycling last year’s speech verbatim for $250,000 is she?
Its these sort of unprincipled defenses Clinton’s behaviour that makes all the legitimate defenses seem unprincipled as well as if you just happened to stumble on on an excuse with some basis.
And her refusal to release the contents of her speech gave him cover.
Because she was asked for the speeches before his tax returns became an issue.
No, its not. The notion that Obama was not actually born in the USA was racist bullshit.
The notion that Clinton might have said something politically damaging during those speeches turns out to be entirely accurate.
Its these sort of defenses that make all your other excuses for her behaviour seem shallow. Like you would find a way to defend pretty much anything she did no matter how far you had to stretch.
Its one of the things that made him so beatable and yet Hillary couldn’t manage that simple task. She couldn’t beat Donald Fucking Trump! That’s how bad she is. Whatever fuckgin excuse you come up with, this country elected a black man bamed barack hussein obama TWICE and you have to make excuses about why Hillary couldn’t beat donald fucking trump.
[
Yes, you seem to have a hard time getting upset about anything to do with Hillary except the fact that she lost.
Blaming Rubio and Cruz for Trump? Sure. I can agree with that. I blame the Republican party for carefully and deliberately molding their base to walk right up to the edge of blatant racism and sexism without losing plausible deniability and then acting shocked (SHOCKED I tell you) when a charlatan like Trump realizes that he can win just by crossing that line. And Hillary lost to THAT!
I think the Benghazi hearings helped her. I remember thinking that it would really help Bernie if the Republicans held congressional hearing to question him about socialism or pedophilia or fucking anything.
Lots of insinuation that she opened herself up to. You say its all smoke. Well people said that about her speeches too until her speeches got hacked and released and it turns out she was telling the bank of brazil that she believed in open borders.
Lots of smoke you say. People were saying that about the DNC and how she was basically cheating during the primary too. All Smoke. Until they hacked Donna Brazile’s emails and found out that Hillary was being fed debate questions. The argument that its all smoke doesn’t hold water with this sort of history.
What was in the powell emails and what was in the hillary emails?
You’re right, she just wiped it with a cloth.
Tell me again what were the contents of Powells emails? How much of it was classified at the time or even afterwards and compare that to Hillary’s emails.
Once you establish she’s a cheater, who gives a shit.
You can claim anything.
Sure, I have a list 20 names long. Biden, Rendell, Bloomberg, Bernie, Warren, etc. Any and all of them would have done better than Hillary. But they just couldn’t beat her democratic machininations in the primary.
So now the narrative is that Donald was an unbeatable candidate? Seriously? He beat the other republicans because he out-Republicaned them.
The zeitgeist didn’t move from electing Barack Obama to electing Trump because the pendulum has swung back hard. Society didn’t change, they just rejected Hillary and for reasons that are entirely Hillary’s fault.
When you lose to Donald Trump, you don’t get to blame anyone else.
If you find yourself saying that Trump was basically unbeatable, you might want to check some of your underlying assumptions about why Hillary lost and how electable she was to begin with.
Slave states? You mean like Virginia? The largest state in the union and a slave state? Why did THEY want the electoral college again? Slavery is the reason for everything in the constitution that liberals don’t like, isn’t it?
You don’t think Democrats go to Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, Detroit, Cinncinnati, cleveland, miami, etc? Swing states have cities too.
Wait, so she didn’t give that speech to the bank of brazil?
Wait, so Debbie Wasserman Schultz (who she hired after she was chased out of her position at the DNC) and Donna Brazile weren’t in the bag for her?
Wait, so she didn’t erase emails after a subpoena was issued? Oh that’s right, she wiped it with a cloth.
Wait, so she didn’t lose to Donald fucking Trump. Seriously, this makes that story arc in DC comics when Lex Luthor won the presidency seem mild by fucking comparison.
Leaders have to get people to follow. She might make a good bureaucrat but what has she ever done that makes you think she would be a good president? She never won an election where the skids weren’t greased for her benefit. Seriously, if she wasn’t Bill Clinton’s wife, she would be a wealthy but relatively anonymous partner at a law firm somewhere helping corporation do whatever corporations need to do.
Funny, I remember hearing the same thing in 2008.
Democracy is best (but only if my candidate wins). amirite?
That is the system we have had for 250 years and you want to chuck it because you don’t like who won this time?
How is an elector literally ignoring the vote any better?
Partly but not entirely. Bill Clinton really did have some odd ideas about economics that were far to the right of the New Deal Democratic Party. And he did let lots of local businesses disappear while he aligned himself with Robert Rubin.
Pocketbook issues matter, maybe matter most of all. And Ivy Leaguer Baby Boomers like the Clintons managed to throw them away.
If small businesses in America had been able to recover from Reagan, instead of Bubba signing on to continue the damage, I expect we could have put up with gays in the military and all that. And the billionaire malcontents who said stuff about the Clintons probably would have continued to just be seen as crank billionaires.
Martin O’Malley seemed very non-fringe to me. Maybe the poster was thinking of Lincoln Chafee or Larry Lessig? I mean, those guys seem pretty moderate, but I guess that might be “fringe” to a partisan Democrat.
That said, O’Malley might never live down the mass arrests. He was a bad candidate because of that stuff.
You’re not from around here?