-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
CNN : Biden: Clinton never figured out why she was running
- Thread starter fantomena
- Start date
- Status
He has some rough edges but overall he has been fantastic. I hope he's energized to help the party, but also recognizes how he helped the disaster form.
wesleyshark
Banned
I'm in Pittsburgh. Both Trump and Clinton were here several times. The difference is that Hillary never went outside largely populated areas like Pittsburgh and Philadelphia. Trump did. Since Pennsylvania has voted Democrat for so many previous elections, I guess she didn't feel that she needed to actually campaign in the rural areas. She ignored those voters, and in turn, they either didn't vote or they voted Trump.
Cesare Borgia
Banned
"I'm With Her" will go down as one of the worst campaign slogans.
Trump saying "I'm with you" showed how shitty her slogan was.
ClosingADoor
Member
The solution is not the constantly yell at those people they are racist, but to take those issues and explain why you have better solutions.
Father_Brain
Banned
I have literally not encountered a single Clinton supporter who has been able to tell me, in one to two sentences, what the overarching message or rationale behind Clinton's campaign was. Everyone I've seen try has just started listing off policy proposals, as though wonkery is what people vote on.
Hillary would have had a problem with any slogan because of the perception that she's elitist and not genuine. Bernie Sanders - a total nobody before this election in the mind of voters - basically ran on not being that and ran well against her.
TwEE-N-Toast
Banned
Seems pretty common sense here. Unfortunately because of how far gone some people are they'll only hear alt-right rhetoric.
outunderthestars
Banned
Exactly.
It doesn't help if someone is right, but comes across as an asshole in doing so.
Trojita
Rapid Response Threadmaker
Yeah, no one is winning PA by just flying into Philly, Pittsburgh, and Harrisburg.
It wasn't just her not turning out either. There literally wasn't any kind investment or engagement in the suburban and rural areas. If rumors coming out of Michigan are true, it was hubris by the DNC and Clinton's campaign that they didn't need to do a ground game and that tv ads were enough.
She pretty much left the position of Secretary of State to ensure she didn't get brought down with the anti-Obama sentiment of 2012 to ensure she was in a successful position to challenge in 2016. Her own twitter account before the election is even done would say things like Happy Birthday Future President with a picture of her. People were so convinced she just DESERVED it and maybe she did. She was clearly the most qualified candidate this year. But it was almost like people believed she should have won in 08 and now deserved to win as an ordained right. Hearing reports of her being hysterical and breaking down and refusing to concede on election night, it just seems she also believed this election was hers. And with winning the popular vote by millions and still losing maybe it is true. The appeal of being the first woman president of a superpower/hyperpowet and known forever in world and human history would definitely be strong.
Joe Shlabotnik
Banned
I don't think Biden is far off the mark with most of his comments here, but just so you know, he's closer to the center (i.e. further right) than Hillary on just about everything except maybe foreign intervention.
I'd vote for him in a heartbeat over literally any GOP candidate and then some, but if you're inclined to be anti-establishment or think the Democratic party is too far right overall, he's inarguably a more centrist lifelong political creature than Clinton. But also more personable.
The other guy openly lied to them about bringing back the way of life they lost, anything else is going to sound like shit. By giving them an other to blame, he lied to them. He gave them someone to fight against, someone, who if they beat, could return to them what they lost. You can't compete against that with the truth and the fact is even Obama probably wouldn't have won.
Trump sold them a lie they wanted to believe. A lie steeped in hate. Arguing better solutions in the face of that is useless because they want to believe the lie.
I honestly don't think anyone could tell you how to defeat that. Luckily Trump will have to deliver on his lie, so it shouldn't be as hard to win in four years.
excelsiorlef
Member
"You can't eat equality" is a horrible phrase.
For the record Clinton won the demographic most likely to be hungry. Like people forget she won the under 50 000$ a year vote.
For the record Clinton won the demographic most likely to be hungry. Like people forget she won the under 50 000$ a year vote.
Father_Brain
Banned
For all the shallow, cheap-shot mockery the YAS QUEEN SLAY cult of vapid diva worship around her has gotten from the left - which I've engaged in my share of, I admit - that shit really was part of her how campaign thought. They genuinely seemed to believe that despite her abysmal favorables for the entire campaign, her greatness was self-evident and people should be honored just to have the chance to vote for her.
See also, this godawful closing ad run in multiple swing states: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cKDHioNLb4I
AFAIK, her support in those demographics deteriorated significantly compared to Obama's. In fact, in some polling, <$30K actually had the largest GOP swing of any income bracket this year.
It has been done countless times. In the words of Clinton herself, those people are unredeemable. They appeal to racism and bigotry even if such views lead to their own personal nightmare.
Good Job Bob
Member
She was running because it was "her turn" dammit.
ClosingADoor
Member
A portion of them, sure. But the people who stayed home or switched votes could definitely be kept in the Democratic camp by someone who could bring the message across.
But that is hindsight. I was 100% sure Clinton was going to win also, and you only see the sings clearly after it is done.
If you already tell people they are unredeemable, good luck winning them over for your cause. That is the mindset that is having progressives losing at the moment. You might be right, you might be sure of it, but you still need to convince people. And you don't do that by presenting yourself as the superior person telling the little guys what to do and think.
I'm not saying people are rational. If they were, Trump would have lost. That is why you need to offer your solutions from a standpoint they can identify with, instead of telling them they are terrible people.
dynamitejim
Member
And yet so many of them who rely on the ACA voted for the guy who is going to repeal it. And it's healthcare costs that have eaten into people's wages the most.
Not everyone who voted for or supported Trump was racist. A lot of them were simply able to ignore massively racist undertones. There's a difference.
excelsiorlef
Member
DWS became head of the DNC in... 2011
That ain't much of a difference.
And_Gignac
Member
I think that's evident by how she disappeared after the election. Losers lay down after elections blah blah is not an excuse. This was not a normal election, Trump is a normal president elect.
She should have lied more. That's what feeds the people apparently.
In all seriousness, she wasn't as personable or inspiring, I'll concede that point, but the cards were stacked against her in many ways we've never seen before. It'll take some time, but the Clintons will be remembered more positively in the future. It was only 2 or 3 years ago that her approval ratings were really high.
In all seriousness, she wasn't as personable or inspiring, I'll concede that point, but the cards were stacked against her in many ways we've never seen before. It'll take some time, but the Clintons will be remembered more positively in the future. It was only 2 or 3 years ago that her approval ratings were really high.
I think you missed the clearly implied *wink
Not to people who put value in facts or logic, no. But that's not who we're talking about in the first place.
If this kind of thinking persist the dems will never winning the Senate or house again.
I disagree. Even so you are enabling an environment of racism. Racism and bigotry should be condemned by everyone even if you are not the one who is spreading it. And you start by not voting for the a racist.
Those idiots who voted for the racist and sexist moron are no better than avowed racists and sexists.
You have to play the blame game too. That's the only way to win against Trump-type rhetoric. I think Sanders had the right idea - he pointed at banks and the ultra-rich and said "It's THOSE guys fault."
There's natural class friction. It's been building for years. It would have been easy to exploit, but it wasn't an avenue for Clinton because... well, that'd not a group she could afford to alienate.
I won't argue with you on that, but if true, doesn't that mean a vast majority of Americans - who are by and large okay enough with Trump that they voted for him or didn't bother showing up or fighting against his rhetoric - are racist?
If so, you have to reach out to racists. You can't get a majority without them, full stop.
Raven117
Member
YOU SHOULD HAVE RUN JOE
I got into a very heated argument with a self-proclaimed "progressive" and dear friend of mine years ago after I got back from a year long trip in Africa and India.
I kept saying..dude...while all of this is important to us as people and Americans and we have come along way with more ground yet still to cover...its a luxurious problem to have when compared to war, genocide, starvation, disease.
Making sure one can pee in the right bathroom (or many other social issues) is quite frankly not as important as making sure your population is fed and not being killed. It truly is a matter of perspective...
This isn't a popular stance. I understand that. But sometimes cold calculations must be made.
In America we can do both, and I hope we continue to do so to make sure we progress equality to everyone and take affirmative steps to do so.
We also need to make sure everyone gets fed. (literally and metaphorically).
This.
I got into a very heated argument with a self-proclaimed "progressive" and dear friend of mine years ago after I got back from a year long trip in Africa and India.
I kept saying..dude...while all of this is important to us as people and Americans and we have come along way with more ground yet still to cover...its a luxurious problem to have when compared to war, genocide, starvation, disease.
Making sure one can pee in the right bathroom (or many other social issues) is quite frankly not as important as making sure your population is fed and not being killed. It truly is a matter of perspective...
This isn't a popular stance. I understand that. But sometimes cold calculations must be made.
In America we can do both, and I hope we continue to do so to make sure we progress equality to everyone and take affirmative steps to do so.
We also need to make sure everyone gets fed. (literally and metaphorically).
She deserved to lose just for that one sentence.
BackLogJoe
Member
On one hand I think to myself, Joe was dealing with his son's passing.
On the other hand I think, Joe swore the same oath that Obama did and if he felt he could have won, then he should have to stop Trump.
On the other hand I think, Joe swore the same oath that Obama did and if he felt he could have won, then he should have to stop Trump.
DOESN'T ANYONE RECOGNIZE SARCASM ANYMORE?!?!
We live in the age of Trump. Sarcasm is dead.
Kid Kamikaze10
Member
It really is horrible.
You may not be able to eat equality, but a decent wage isn't going to stop a bullet.
A good job isn't going to stop minority employees from catching extra flack at that job, get paid less, and ultimately suffer mentally and physically.
You can't eat equality. You can't eat civil rights either. But you know what's going to stop a dude like me from eating? Getting discriminated out of jobs, losing the right to vote, prison in general.
Joe Shlabotnik
Banned
This is infuriating. This forum would be littered with "SHUT UP YOU LOST GO AWAY YOU'RE NOT HELPING" if she didn't... shut up. You're telling me you really want to hear more from her now?
Personally and politically, she is still sorting through the wreckage. What use would she be right now?
This is why I said in the end the Dem Leadership cost them the election. DNC was too involved with Clinton, superdelegates had pledged very early on, Big Labor unions also went with her, Donor class also decided she was the chosen one, while Obama and Biden also didn't do much as far as trying to correct the ship. Someone should have stepped up but all we get now is just contemplation of 4 years of Trump.
Cesare Borgia
Banned
1. This is bullshit, no matter how many times it's posted. Obama did not force Biden out, he gave him the reality of the situation which was that the entire establishment was behind Clinton. This is no different from what happened to Romney in 2015.
2. The idea that Biden would beat Hillary is laughable. And I say that as someone who was ready to work on his campaign
clevbrowns94
Member
So not only did his son dying suck in general (seemed like a nice guy) and for Biden's family, but we probably have President Trump because of it. Worst death ever.
Saw it this morning, it makes my blood boil. Worst hubris ever.
A no name 75 year old socialist from a small state ran (uphill) well enough against her. She's an awful candidate and Biden wouldn't have had any problem running on being a continuation of the Obama presidency.
Thanks Obama.
Father_Brain
Banned
I don't think there's more than a modest chance Hillary would have won anything resembling a fully open and competitive primary; she had never won a competitive election in her career until this year, and the fact that Sanders was able to get as far as he did without any meaningful support from the party indicates that there was fairly deep discontent with her.
- Status