Trump really is a terrible racist, sexist, serial groping, mentally ill, narcissist idiot. Nobody noticed that he was like this until, coincidentally, he decided to run against Democrats. Somehow, he managed to luck into defeating all the other Republican candidates and Clinton, in spite being an insane moron.
Or…
2. Clinton really did become corrupt over many years of being involved in establishment politics. WikiLeaks, whose integrity had generally been accepted by liberals before this, actually is correct in implicating her in numerous incidents of corruption and deception: http://www.mostdamagingwikileaks.com
…and the freak out over Trump is orchestrated by the people who wanted the cover up to continue.
Personally, I think corrupt politicians are way more common than people who are THAT incredibly lucky in life.
Can I pick 3 - Trump really is a terrible racist, sexist, serial groping, mentally ill, narcissist idiot. Everyone knew this. Somehow, he managed to luck into defeating all the other Republican candidates and Clinton, in spite being an insane moron.
Although Clinton was/is corrupt, she was arguably a lot more competent in the conventional sense than Trump at his best or worst. You can say Clinton was deeply corrupt and still be surprised that she lost.
I’m not sure what plausibility has to do with this. #1 is a fact.
That’s not to say that Hillary Clinton is the perfect candidate, of course. But Trump is indeed a bad person, which has been known for decades, and he got extremely lucky.
Trump has been an obvious racist, sexist, serial groping, mentally ill, narcissist idiot for decades. It was obvious to most people who knew anything about Trump. He tried to run as a Democrat and failed.
Then he switched to the Republicans and succeeded. He was still the same obvious racist, sexist, serial groping, mentally ill, narcissist idiot he had always been but it didn’t matter now. The fact that it took Trump so long to figure out which party he belonged in is further proof that he’s an idiot.
Is Clinton corrupt? Yes, probably. Maybe even more corrupt than the average politician. But she’s nowhere near as corrupt as Trump. Trump is probably the most personally corrupt President we’ve ever had. Among his other failings, he’s been pocketing millions in bribes. So anyone who didn’t like corruption should have voted for Clinton.
I’m guessing this thread isn’t going the way you pictured it would in your head. You undoubtedly imagined that you would throw this out there and everyone would be stunned by your irrefutable logic.
As much as I shake my head at the hardcore Democrats on this board, especially the Saint Hillary crowd, they don’t hold a candle to conservatives for sheer denial of reality. The first time Trump made it into the NYT was back in the 1970s when the Justice Department sued him for discrimination, and various people have commented on his racism and related stories of him treating black employees in a racist manner on a continuing basis since then. It’s a similar story with sexism and groping, it’s been the topic of discussion and jokes for decades. And his narcissistic personality has also been the topic of discussion and jokes for decades, as well as people calling him ‘mentally ill’ because of it. The idea that ‘no one noticed’ character traits that have been mentioned for decades is completely at odds with reality.
Also on point two, the Democratic establishment is not actually the same group as the “Liberals” who are fans of wikileaks. If you think they are, can you cite sources with people like Obama, Clinton (either one), or other higher ups praising the integrity of wikileaks? Here’s an article where Clinton criticized Wikileaks in 2010 Clinton condemns leak as 'attack on international community' - CNN.com and Obama hounded wikileaks founder Julian Assange to the point that he claimed Obama was on a ‘witch hunt’ against him https://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/20/world/europe/assange-casts-himself-as-persecuted-whistle-blower.html . I mean, I’m sure you can find some group of people that you can slap the label ‘liberals’ on who thought highly of Wikileaks, but if you’re using it in the usual conservative sense that includes Obama and Clinton you’re clearly just wrong.
Trump won the election because he more or less accidentally managed to tap into a group of voters that nobody really knew existed. But Trump didn’t know that either. He thought he was going to lose right up to election night.
Before the election got underway, I was having lunch with some airplane mechanics who were name dropping (since privately owned aircraft are typically owned by large corporations or very famous people). The subject of Trump came up: anytime a jet is serviced, the costs are in the 6 figures. When they sent the bill to Trump’s people, they sent it back red lining all of the fees they weren’t going to pay, along with a promise of a lawsuit. These guys (blue collar - I have no idea who they ended up voting for) all agreed that Trump was a deadbeat who didn’t pay his bills.
Anybody who paid attention was aware that Trump was a con man and a loathsome person. It wasn’t hard to find out
And 4: The corruption allegations against Clinton have never been shown to have any substance, and even those pointing to a document dump by Wikileaks can’t pick out which, if any, actually mean something, but cover that lack of substance by denouncing something called “the Saint Hillary crowd”.
She’s human. So is he. But, like most of us, she’s a much better human than he is.
You didn’t read the website I linked above to some of the worst revelations from Wiki, did you?
It’s hard to picture you actually meant to say, “Hey, who HASN’T provided terrorist supporting countries with arms in exchange for money? That’s a normal human foible. We all make mistakes!”
Oh, I am surprised she lost. All that money, most of the media on her side, most of the establishment on her side - and she still managed to screw it up. Pretty embarrassing.
The first thing to remember is that Trump didn’t crush Clinton and a massive Red wave, he barely squeaked by in a race he was expected to lose. As to how this happened:
On the Trump side he was the first politician to realize two things about the world today.
that we are now in situation where partisanship trumps* rationality. People will believe what they want to believe is true regardless of reality, and will in fact just dig in deeper when confronted with facts that contradict their view. So Trump was unconstrained by the realty that the other candidates were bounded by. He could claim that he would provide everyone with excellent cheap healthcare coverage with no mandate, that he would build a wall that would remove all these unwanted Latinos and make Mexico pay for it, and that all of the bad things that they thought about Muslims and Mexicans were justified because they are all terrorists and rapists who hate America. Which brings us to…
He realized that the right no longer needed a dog whistle. The rest of the Republcan party had been following Lee Atwaters advice regarding “nigger, nigger, nigger”, but Trump had racism of the 50’s and 60’s hadn’t gone away, it had just gone underground where it had been allowed to fester, and that with the election of a black president had reached critical mass, and Trump was there to focus it when it exploded, as opposed to his Republican opponents who were still trying for plausible deniability. Unfortunately this only holds if you are a Republican. As a Republican you can disparage whole races of people as subhuman, terrorists rapists and murders, but if a Democrat calls people who have those views deplorable, then that is beyond the pale.
On Clinton’s side, she had been on the receiving end of non-stop mud slinging for 22 years, ever since she was viewed as an uppity first lady who was pulling the strings behind her husbands presidency. I can’t think of any other politician in American history has had such hate constantly directed against them for such a long period of time. Despite all this scrutiny nothing actionable was actually turned up against her. But the years of being the target of mud slinging had left an association in peoples minds that with mud, so that even Liberals who couldn’t point to anything specific that she had done were left with the impression that there was something dirty about her.
The second thing that hurt Clinton was her perceived inevitability. After 8 years of Republican obstructionism, Americans were fed up with buisiness as usual and in the mood to send a message to Washington. They might not have actually been in the mood to send a ill mannered racist narcissistic demagogue to the white house, but since Clinton was going to win anyway they could safely stay home, or even launch a protest vote for the cretin. But OOOPS it turned out that enough people thought this way and so it became no longer safe.
I was specifically referring to #3 on the site I posted above : http://www.mostdamagingwikileaks.com #9, #15, #40, and #75 could all be related though.