# What do you think of Hillary's smack down of Sanders? **URL:** \ **Category:** Politics & Elections\ **Created:** [December 5, 2019, 9:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-do-you-think-of-hillarys-smack-down-of-sanders/844427 "2019-12-05T21:18:58Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 10\ **Page:** 6
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [December 10, 2019, 1:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-do-you-think-of-hillarys-smack-down-of-sanders/844427/101 "2019-12-10T01:44:40Z")
> [@octopus](#): > > Of course they matter. They just aren’t all that matters. Under the EC, they don’t matter. Only swing state votes matter. ---
**Author:** ![octopus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/octopus/32/3716_2.png) [@octopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/octopus)\ **Post date:** [December 10, 2019, 1:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-do-you-think-of-hillarys-smack-down-of-sanders/844427/102 "2019-12-10T01:49:50Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > Under the EC, they don’t matter. Only swing state votes matter. That’s not accurate. They absolutely matter. It’s just that there is a local surplus is all. I can guarantee you that the Democratic voters of California aren’t going to stay home entirely and let the Republicans have what doesn’t matter. ---
**Author:** ![DSeid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dseid/32/20194_2.png) [@DSeid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DSeid)\ **Post date:** [December 10, 2019, 2:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-do-you-think-of-hillarys-smack-down-of-sanders/844427/103 "2019-12-10T02:41:33Z")
> [@Damuri\_Ajashi](#): > > In what way did Saint Cad Mistate the facts? And in what way was that mistatement bullshit? Everything he said seem accurate. … It is “ahistoric bullshit” because it is [a falsehood](https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/hillary-clinton-donald-trumps-campaigns-numbers/story?id=43356783) that HRC ran a national popularity contest strategy. Who spread themselves over more states, Clinton or Trump? Trump. He campaigned in 45 states to Clinton’s 37. Both had the same top four states since cinching their respective nominations (with him an extra week and half to do): Florida; Ohio; Pennsylvania; and North Carolina. (True Trump on average 16 visits to HRC’s average of 14. Yes, she spent more time doing fundraisers in California, resulting in a spend of $253 million on ads in competitive states to Trump’s $93 million, and spent the most in Florida. He played the media well and got free coverage more. And she took Michigan and Wisconsin for granted. Which clearly was a big mistake. > [@Damuri\_Ajashi](#): > > … The electoral college has a protective function that acts as a fuse against a tyranny of the majority. … A coalition of multiple groups together representing a majority is not “tyranny of the majority”, but what we have now is tyranny of the _minority_. Rural voters should not be ignored but their votes structurally are “more equal” than others. That is not right. > [@Damuri\_Ajashi](#): > > How do you know that the winner wouldn’t have gotten more of the popular vote if they were trying to get a majority of the popular vote rather than the electoral vote? … Don’t (although he with free media ran a more national campaign than Clinton did spending money in specific states). That is why I cannot call the result anything other than “legitimate” as those were the rules going in. But from the POV of what best represents the will of the people and what and who more Americans want, which system of rules is more legitimate? ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [December 10, 2019, 3:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-do-you-think-of-hillarys-smack-down-of-sanders/844427/104 "2019-12-10T03:13:21Z")
> [@octopus](#): > > That’s not accurate. They absolutely matter. It’s just that there is a local surplus is all. I can guarantee you that the Democratic voters of California aren’t going to stay home entirely and let the Republicans have what doesn’t matter. Bullshit. Turnout is significantly higher in swing/battleground states. The EC depresses turnout because so many states aren’t competitive. Voters know that they don’t matter, unless they’re in one of those special states. ---
**Author:** ![octopus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/octopus/32/3716_2.png) [@octopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/octopus)\ **Post date:** [December 10, 2019, 3:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-do-you-think-of-hillarys-smack-down-of-sanders/844427/105 "2019-12-10T03:21:41Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > Bullshit. Turnout is significantly higher in swing/battleground states. The EC depresses turnout because so many states aren’t competitive. Voters know that they don’t matter, unless they’re in one of those special states. Well that’s unfortunate. Time to work on that constitutional amendment. How did this tired tangent get started again? Hillary smacking Sanders? Why not? ---
**Author:** ![DSeid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dseid/32/20194_2.png) [@DSeid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DSeid)\ **Post date:** [December 10, 2019, 3:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-do-you-think-of-hillarys-smack-down-of-sanders/844427/106 "2019-12-10T03:42:35Z")
> [@octopus](#): > > … How did this tired tangent get started again? … Yes to bring it back, the tangent began with a claim that because she lost the EC it is clear that Americans overwhelmingly reject her ideas. And nah they don’t, we don’t. But at this point, as much as I supported her and think she would have been an excellent president, as much as I loved her ideas, I don’t especially care what she thinks about the political dynamics of this cycle or her retrospective thoughts about her last run. Punditry for the first and boring for the second. Those who do care ae free to, but interestingly enough it is those who dislike her who seem to be paying attention to her pontifications more than her past supporters. I think I speak for many of her past supporters - we’ve moved on. ---
**Author:** ![Lance\_Turbo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lance_turbo/32/6156_2.png) [@Lance\_Turbo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lance_Turbo)\ **Post date:** [December 10, 2019, 4:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-do-you-think-of-hillarys-smack-down-of-sanders/844427/107 "2019-12-10T04:20:54Z")
> [@Damuri\_Ajashi](#): > > In what way did Saint Cad Mistate the facts? And in what way was that mistatement bullshit? He described things that didn’t happen as if they had happened. That’s like textbook ahistorical bullshit. ---
**Author:** ![octopus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/octopus/32/3716_2.png) [@octopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/octopus)\ **Post date:** [December 10, 2019, 4:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-do-you-think-of-hillarys-smack-down-of-sanders/844427/108 "2019-12-10T04:38:17Z")
> [@DSeid](#): > > Yes to bring it back, the tangent began with a claim that because she lost the EC it is clear that Americans overwhelmingly reject her ideas. > > And nah they don’t, we don’t. > > But at this point, as much as I supported her and think she would have been an excellent president, as much as I loved her ideas, I don’t especially care what she thinks about the political dynamics of this cycle or her retrospective thoughts about her last run. Punditry for the first and boring for the second. Those who do care ae free to, but interestingly enough it is those who dislike her who seem to be paying attention to her pontifications more than her past supporters. I think I speak for many of her past supporters - we’ve moved on. You don’t think the multiple factions of the political parties actually like the other intraparty factions? What Mrs. Clinton has to say has to be on the mind of the non-progressive branch, aka the sane branch, of the Democratic Party. This far left pandering has to be terrifying to the powers that be. ---
**Author:** ![DSeid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dseid/32/20194_2.png) [@DSeid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DSeid)\ **Post date:** [December 10, 2019, 4:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-do-you-think-of-hillarys-smack-down-of-sanders/844427/109 "2019-12-10T04:52:49Z")
Oh I agree with what she said. I just don’t care that she said it, or something completely different. ---
**Author:** ![nelliebly](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/nelliebly/32/5422_2.png) [@nelliebly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/nelliebly)\ **Post date:** [December 10, 2019, 8:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-do-you-think-of-hillarys-smack-down-of-sanders/844427/110 "2019-12-10T08:01:42Z")
> [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](#): > > Sanders’s “I’m sick and tired of hearing about her damn emails” was a classy moment. He was never interested in attacking her over bullshit reasons. > > As for the timing of his endorsement of her, how does that compare to the timing of her endorsement of Obama in 2008? Honest question. > > It looks to me like a lot of folks want to marginalize leftists further, and this whole stupid attack on Sanders is as dumb as the leftists’ attacks on Wasserman-Schulz. THere’s definitely room for debate within the left on policy, but this sort of internecine squabbling is counterproductive. 2008: Clinton endorsed Obama on June 7th. 2016: Sanders endorsed Clinton on July 12th. So a month later. [One in ten Sanders supporters voted for Trump](https://www.npr.org/2017/08/24/545812242/1-in-10-sanders-primary-voters-ended-up-supporting-trump-survey-finds). That’s not a huge number, but > [@](#): > > Specifically, if the Sanders-Trump voters in Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania had voted for Clinton, or even stayed home on Election Day, those states would have swung to Clinton, and she would have won 46 more electoral votes, putting her at 278 — enough to win, in other words. But those voters almost certainly wouldn’t have voted for Clinton in the first place. I wonder how many of those who supported Sanders didn’t vote at all because they were so disgruntled that Clinton got the nomination. And how many of those non-voters would have voted and voted for Clinton (especially in MI, WI, and PA) if Sanders had never run? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-do-you-think-of-hillarys-smack-down-of-sanders/844427.md?page=5)