Umm, no. I can watch the 1984 or 1972 election results on YouTube if I want to see what that would be like. Bernie has been nothing but toxic poison and I’m glad this is his last run. It’s too bad that Warren’s stans are adopting Bernie’s scorched earth tactics at least on Twitter.
Not to the issue that it was raised in response to, whether or not “the American people have made it quite clear that they don’t like her ideas”?
More voting for her than against her falsifies that specific proposition. I guess one could argue that they hated her ideas but loved her sparkling charismatic personality and the way she inspired them … uh no. Americans in aggregate liked her ideas … and even her. Elections are not won in aggregate though of course, are not always won by the choice that the most Americans like the ideas of. Rural votes each count for more, structurally, and votes in just a few states matter much more than many others. All true but not pertinent to what Americans think of her ideas.
I’m not thrilled with Sanders and I really want to avoid pilling on the Hillary hate, but she was deeply flawed candidate and whenever she speaks my reaction nowdays is basically just shut up.
Hillary is still a child. I’m a Bernie Sanders supporter, and I was glad she lost. Her legacy will be losing to a clown like Trump and I’m sure it will be spray-painted all over her grave. Lady Macbeth, voting for EVERY single war. Never did a damn thing for the people.
“We came, we saw, he died”
Clinton’s kinda weird in that I think people respect her abilities and she would have made a fine President. But she was a horrible politician and really bad at strategy, which is why she got outwitted by Obama and then somehow managed to lose the electoral map(by a wide margin) to Trump. But you’re right, the public does seem to have confidence in her abilities and her ideas are reasonable.
The character weaknesses though, as highlighted by her blaming everyone but herself for her loss, is part of the reason elections she should have won easily were close enough that she could lose by dumb luck or better strategy by the opposing campaign. It’s also why she had so much trouble in 2016. Sanders is not performing well enough in 2020 to confirm that he should have been any particular threat to Clinton, yet she lost 23 states to him.
Aren’t you backing Pete Buttigieg?
Yeah, I think your opinion on what is politically popular can be easily dismissed.
I think there are five times as many white people as black people in this country. Also, the Democrats need to grab up alienated young voters. If Biden’s support skews disproportionately black & old, it’s not that that’s awful, but it’s not really such a good thing.
I’m not for running someone like Pete Buttigieg with zero black support, but someone with broad working-class appeal is what you’re looking for. Biden, Warren, & Sanders all have some of that; any would have a good chance of winning the general.
But Sanders also gets anti-corruption and anti-imperialist voters who might otherwise vote Green or something. He’s the one who expands the base.
Warren is a good candidate, too, and likely enough she can get in on the novelty of being a woman (one with her own name & career, unlike Mrs. Clinton).
Biden is probably the worst of the top three, but he has name recognition.
I doubt that anyone like Castro or Klobuchar, let alone baby mayor man, is going to overtake those three.
There are many reasons to hate Hillary. Losing toTrump is simply the last nail in the coffin
She won the popular vote by 3 million and she won California by 5 million. If the popular vote was all that counted, maybe Trump wouldn’t have spent as much time in Wisconsin and Michigan as he did and just drummed up extra votes in Texas or something.
The popular vote is meaningless unless you want to argue that the states are gerrymandered.
Washington DC is packed to the gills with very smart, competent people with great ideas. What makes them answerable to the politicians rather than the other way around is that they do not have the ability to win a competitive election, and neither does Hillary.
I don’t completely disagree with this but it is somewhat odd that as poor of a political operator as she may be, one of the reasons for some people to hate her is that she, to them, represents “politicians” and “the political elite”. I think her problem is that she tried to be politically savvy but was not very good at it … if all along she had just been herself (which what she has been doing lately, just saying what she thinks, fuck it), I think she’d had done better. But she got burned from that early on and overcompensated with constant trying to edit herself as she spoke.
The popular vote is functionally meaningless, but this shouldn’t be the case. It’s mind boggling to me that you think it’s acceptable that the votes of most Americans really don’t matter, based on nothing more than geography. In my preferred system, every single American, no matter what state they live in, would have the exact same voting influence. Everyone’s vote would count exactly the same. You haven’t articulated any reason why it’s good that the votes of most Americans don’t matter.
I believe there is some extent a gender issue with that. That whole “they go low we go high” mantra would probably have been disregarded if it were a male since two men trying to show who is more macho is seen as normal but the woman is expected to take the smears and the lies with grace and be above that.
Hey, if I bought a major news network and paid it to tell lies about you non-stop, and then spread even worse lies through arms-length operatives I could disassociate myself from if need be, and I continued that for going on three decades, I bet you’d end up a pretty lousy politician, too. Not to mention the rabid fans of a marginally-popular candidate from your own party using you as a scapegoat for why their guy, who has serious problems picking up minority votes, lost a competitive primary in the party where minority votes actually matter.
But yeah, Hillary’s a Witch. You can find endless validation for that point of view. How accurate is it? Just never you mind!
Not really. Hillary only got 48.18% of the popular vote.
So not only did Hillary NOT get a majority of the total popular vote (only 48.18% of it), but it is not intellectually honest to use the argument that she got more votes than Trump because, as hard as this is to believe, Trump ran his election to win the electoral college meaning working the states where the swing of a few votes could (and did) change the election. IF Trump did what Hillary did and campaigned for the most votes possible no matter where they were from then the comparison would be valid.
Nitpick but precisely accurate correction noted. She, and her ideas presumptively, got the most votes. Not exactly a rejection of her ideas.
As for the claim that she ran to get the most votes, that’s false. She took some states for granted that she should not have and played the game poorly, but to my read the intent was to build strength in other states looking to the future, not just 2020, but others in elections to come, trying to speed up the day that a Sun Belt strategy is also a viable path.
Yep. Doing the politician act at the Presidential level should be reserved for the truly gifted, like Obama and her husband. Otherwise, just be yourself. There’s a third way, being completely uninteresting but stable, which used to be how most politicians operated, but since Dukakis that seems to have gone out of favor. But it’s an underrated way to go far in politics!
That’s only half true. There is no election in which every vote matters the same except mathematically(everyone gets one vote). The EC violates that principle, but not a huge deal, as EVs roughly correspond to population(with only a few small states really getting a big boost).
But even in a popular vote election, my vote matters more than yours, because I’m a swing voter. We just replace Florida and Ohio voters with swing voters across the country. Which means urban voters will still be ignored and candidates will still focus on the industrial midwest where the Obama/Trump voters are.
Doesn’t this show up a problem in the system?
that somebody can be respected and thought to make a fine president can still lose to Trump?
If that’s the case be looking for problems in the rules of the game than in the performance of the players.