I don't think that's anywhere close to a universally agreed upon point.
-
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.
Hillary Clinton publishing book about 2016 election in Sept titled "What Happened"
- Thread starter johnsmith
- Start date
I don't think that's anywhere close to a universally agreed upon point.
Not Clinton related, just a reminder this happened btw: http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?p=244697611&posted=1#post244697611
Most important testimony in decades. You should read or even better watch it. You really really should. That thread should be 50 pages by now but the thread title prevents that.
Quoted for a new page. Seriously people read this already. This is some seriously important stuff. It strings so much of Trumps and Putins BS together its unbelievable..
Most important testimony in decades. You should read or even better watch it. You really really should. That thread should be 50 pages by now but the thread title prevents that.
Quoted for a new page. Seriously people read this already. This is some seriously important stuff. It strings so much of Trumps and Putins BS together its unbelievable..
He wasn't "unbeatable." But it was unlikely that anyone who was willing to run could beat him in that climate and the ones mentioned above wouldn't have either.
As I've said many times: he won the election even after literally admitting to sexual assault on video. Millions and millions and millions of people saw that, knew it, and thought it was okay.
Trump beat Hillary. He would have beaten Bernie. He would have beaten Warren.
And no one logically thinks freaking Al Gore would have beaten him. Come on.
TurnipFritters
Member
People in this very thread have argued that Clinton pointing out that literal actual neo-nazis were supporting Donald Trump was what sunk her.
Father_Brain
Banned
I'm thoroughly confused by this logic. If you think that people voted for Trump because they weren't suffering enough economically to keep them in line, shouldn't you be cheering on automation and its consequences?
Anyone who's retroactively turned Trump into an invincible candidate is someone far too invested in the narrative of HRC as a perfect candidate to admit that that was total BS.
That's not what he said. What he's saying is effectively "Racism is a luxury good. In good times, people think they can afford to vote on non-economic issues"
"Economic Anxiety" is always in quotes because it's a mask/escuse for the underlying racism and xenophobia.
Sure, but many of those things would only have sunk other candidates because they would have made them reacted 'correctly' to them being called out as scandals, Trumps strength as an outsider candidate was that he, and his team, had no idea how he was 'supposed' to react to them. As it turns out 'bad optics' and scandals are, to some extent, fake ideas that are only real if you want them to be and even something as bad as the pussy grab tape will get swept away by the news cycle if you leave it be. Oh it kept being brought back up sure, but Trump didn't react badly enough for it to be a more important issue beyond the first group of people to get outraged by it. Scandals grow like fire and without you fueling your own defeat they have to get off to an explosive start too big to ignore to matter and without that fuel they just peter out.
The most damaging part of a scandal is the way you handle it and Trump handled them better than most because he wasn't using the same self defeating campaigning rulebook as the career politicians who lost to him.
One thing that held true for Trump throughout the entire campaign cycle- his poll numbers only suffered as long as a flashlight was being held up to him.
This is why they dropped after the RNC, after the debates, after the Access Hollywood tape. But, invariably, the moment attention went elsewhere in the media after a while, his numbers would creep back up again. There was a passive R vote for him that kept crawling back as long as they could ignore what he was.
This is a big reason why as president his numbers aren't doing that anymore- the flashlight is always on now!
Autodidact
Banned
I almost wish we'd gotten the pussy tape now rather than back in October.
Polioliolio
Member
The hell is this.. Most of America voted for her and she was obviously the better candidate.
It's been my pleasure..
Just making caricatures of the soggy cheeto & his adminstration is one of the few positives of his presidency.
This avatar perfectly sums that up.
Salty Rice
Member
Hope she didnt send before the draft of the book per email.
I mean, that's wrong. But sure.
Not wrong though
This thread reminds me why I hate America.
Because in true American fashion, we like to point the blame at others instead of taking responsibility for our shittiness and poor decision-making.
There's absolutely zero reason why anyone should've voted for Trump. Yes, it should've been a slam dunk. But her losing isn't her fault. Americans have jumped the shark really hard.
And nothing will change. The assholes in this thread will keep acting like their temper tantrum is justified, and keep blaming Clinton for this bullshit country and its shit-eating voters.
Because in true American fashion, we like to point the blame at others instead of taking responsibility for our shittiness and poor decision-making.
There's absolutely zero reason why anyone should've voted for Trump. Yes, it should've been a slam dunk. But her losing isn't her fault. Americans have jumped the shark really hard.
And nothing will change. The assholes in this thread will keep acting like their temper tantrum is justified, and keep blaming Clinton for this bullshit country and its shit-eating voters.
exmachina64
Banned
What? No, he didn't. Kerry was a senator for years after he lost the election and later became Obama's second Secretary of State.
He even marched in the March for Women in Washington after the Trump inauguration.
Al Gore's been a public figure and environmental activist since he lost to Bush. His sequel to An Incovenient Truth, An Inconvenient Sequel, is coming out soon.
You literally handwaved their post-campaign lives away to make your point.
crackhead_bob
Member
If not outright racism, what would be the kinder description to explain their reason for voting for this buffoon? Trump voters may say that they didn't vote outright for racist reasons, but they did support and tolerate him in spite of his gaffes. I think this is an important distinction, because I see these folks using semantics in order to weasel their way out of their role in propping up this moron.
Audioboxer
Member
What I said earlier, hardline Conservatives/Republicans vote Conservative/Republican. Doesn't matter who the leader is, the party is what matters most. That isn't about being kind, but understanding how simple the answer can be. After the 1,000,000th time of saying how terrible these people are, waste of spaces, waste of oxygen and you hate their terrible guts, what is next? Well, also as I've said, trying to win an election by the 5~15% margins of realistic voter sway or getting voters off their asses and out voting. Same thing happens with us in the UK, there is next to no point in trying to get lifelong Conservatives/Tories to switch sides. Whether it's their parents/extended family told them to vote Conservative and they do, like zombies, or they genuinely believe voting this way is in their interests (which it often can be from the I've got mine, fuck you, perspective). The greater point is, they're not being changed, or the amount of effort required to have a 5% chance of changing their mind isn't worth the time expended. Challenge them to an extent, debate, call things out, but remember 4 years isn't that long an amount of time to prioritise your battles. If you spend 4 years and the majority of your resources bashing your head against the wall with hardliners, what have you achieved?
I think that was part of Clintons "basket of deplorables" PR kefuffle. There is a questionable gain to spending time obsessing over pointing out how "bad" people are, or spending all your time repeatedly asking how can they vote Republican, how can they vote Republican, how can they vote republican? HOW?! Asking once or twice is natural because it's difficult to process, but it's nearly 2018 and it seems so many are still hung up on how can anyone vote Republican? Many of these people have voted Republican for longer than your or I might have been alive. As I said elections are never going to be won 85% to 15%. You have to run a good, positive and inspiring campaign, not focussing on negatives and voters you cannot sway, but trying to engage those you can and the shocking amounts of people who sit on their asses at home (especially in America where your turnout numbers are absolutely DIRE). Obama did this far better than Clinton, twice. Even although 2nd term Obama's numbers seemed to dip a bit, so even he faced the apparent "one time voters" who act like voting is some buffet where you just pick and choose flippantly when to vote.
So yeah, sometimes it can be challenging trying to be on the side of decency and fight an above board battle where you don't try to lower yourself to snark, one-liners, gotchas and more. It is what it is, truly inspiring leaders who run campaigns on positivity and listening to people do prove every now and then they can amass the 5-15% extra needed to win an election. It's not as if the Democrats have never won before in America. Clinton seemed to be too embroiled in I need to beat Donald Trump, rather than I need to win an election and do what needs to be done to gain that 5-15%. Trying to beat Donald Trump at his game and trying to win an election were two different things. The popular vote alone doesn't win you an American election, targeting the 5-15% in areas where it needs to be, does. If you get the popular vote AND win the election, you look like a king (or queen). If you get the popular vote and lose an election, you still lost an election.
I think the biggest difference I see at times on GAF is while us Brits still do a good bit of moaning about the Conservative party and Conservative voters, we do spend a lot of time talking about the Labour party and what needs to change/be done/thought about. Sometimes peering in on American politics GAF still seems to show so many spending 95% of their time only talking about the Republicans/Republican voters and how terrible they are. The greatest dice roll of risk you run there is before you now it, it'll be 2019 and will all that time just have been spent moaning about how terrible the Republicans are, or will there have been the required about of reflection, change, thinking and work done that is required of the Democrat party to win next time? Arguing about Bernie vs Clinton, just as spending all the time arguing about how terrible Republicans are, isn't going to do much to talk about who the new leader should be, what should the plan for 2020 campaigning be? What should be done differently? Where should the focus be? Etc, etc.
Why do I care? Well, I think even many in the rest of the world do not want to see a 2nd Donald Trump term. So yeah...
harriet the spy
Member
Hypothetical and baseless counterfactuals: the thread.
And yet despite both of those advantages she still managed to fumble the ball and lose to the worst President in the history of the United States.
excelsiorlef
Member
thatsthejoke.gif
harriet the spy
Member
The fact that he is the worst does not mean he was not popular. He is the heritage of the tea party and the alt-right, which are very popular movements in the United States. He is a terrible president, but unfortunately, not a terrible candidate.
IISANDERII
Member
In an ideal world, the Democrats would have put Bernie forward who would have gone ahead and defeated Trump.
Well, four million more people decided to vote for Hillary over Sanders.
Bernie was losing in head-to-head polls until after he lost the primary in March, despite virtually never being attacked by the media, so I don't see how there's the assumption that he would have just strolled on to victory.
Steve Youngblood
Member
No. Noooooo!!!! That is absolutely not what I was angling at!
*Punches monitor*
Aaaaaaaagggghhhhhhh!!!!!!!
Supervlieg
Member
Should have called it "Book of Deplorables"
El_Tiguere
Member
Hillary and Democrat die-hards are STILL as shortsighted as they were in backing "Negative Ratings in the 50's" Hillary Clinton for the nomination. Nevermind that Bernie won the overall under 45 vote, but Hillarystans ignore the basic math of our electorate.
Here goes:
No matter what candidate goes up there, you can reliably predict that "card-carrying" party members on each side will likely account for 48% of the vote going Democrat, and 48% of the vote going Republican. Who makes up that ~4% in the middle that will swing the election one way or the other? INDEPENDENTS!!
So... in knowing that you need independents to get you over the hump... answering a few of these questions will make it abundantly clear that backing Hillary was a grotesque mistake that her supporters need to swallow whole:
1) if 2016 was a change election, when the mood of the country is resoundingly against the usual old corrupt politicians... should we run the poster-child for old corrupt political dynasties if you want to sway independents?
2) if by 2016 more than half of the country was hurting economically from a very uneven economic recovery, should we run a candidate who is championing for staying on the wrong course (note: gallup had it that 70% of the country thought we were headed in the wrong direction)?
3) If the other primary contender has a POSITIVE rating and perception with the people (versus an old corrupt candidate with a NEGATIVE rating almost on par with a racist rapist running against her), AND the other primary contender is favored 60-40 by INDEPENDENTS, which one is a better bet?
4) If independents and young people are witnessing the SPECTACLE of a corrupt party establishment colluding with a campaign and the press to denigrate, mock, or suppress a movement backed by the grassroots impassioned progressives backing a New Deal Democrat (like FDR was) AND are witnessing the spectacle of reliving the 90s with yet another Clinton under investigation... should we be dumb enough to try to shove the anointed party establishment party candidate down the throats of independents who could care less about either party? ... or should we uplift the only candidate promising a bold New Deal 2.0 for America (with policies that the majority now supports).
There are many more questions we can ask in a similar fashion... but it all comes down to a corrupt party who has favored corporations for the past 40 years, giving a corrupt entitled swindler "her turn", at a time where corporations are ravaging every day Americans, and Americans are increasingly tired of it.
Again, Hillary supporters baked their shit cake, and America had to eat it.
He has a point though... Bernie ALWAYS had wider margins against Trump, while Hillary, for all her hubris... was ALWAYS within the margin of error. That margin of error swung against her as the FBI came knocking at her door for a hidden government server in the bathroom basement.
Not a true statement, at all. Not from the start of the race. Not as voting grew close. Not during the 6 weeks of voting when there was actually some slight question as to who would be the nominee.
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/e...s/general_election_trump_vs_clinton-5491.html
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/e...s/general_election_trump_vs_sanders-5565.html
The margin was only in Sanders favor after he lost in March/April, when his supporters grew increasingly bitter. But that's what always happens, like the Kasich bump after he definitively lost his primary.
There's not really any indication that hurt her numbers. It is hard to sync it up to any real movement, and happened too far out from the voting for it to really linger. I don't know why it gets clung to as a reason why she lost. Seems more like a rationalization.
Steve Youngblood
Member
I feel like this is a hell that we will never escape. We'll be eyeing up the 2022 midterms and there'll still be people lamenting that we should have ran Bernie in 2016. Or saying Comey shouldn't have released that letter. Or that Obama should have been tougher on Russia. Or that Hillary should have run a better campaign.
I know we've spent the last six years arguing about this, but if you'll indulge me I'd like you to read my several paragraphs long take about Why Trump Really Won. Let's go back to the beginning. It was a dark and stormy night...
El_Tiguere
Member
Thanks for graphically verifying my point. All those 2s and 3s of Hillary versus all the 8s, 10s, etc of Bernie above Trump. What you are trying so hard to rationalize to rationalize to yourself ("durrr hurrr Bernie Bros were just bitter after his loss") is in reality the FACT that Bernie was still the only candidate of the 3 with a POSITIVE rating, AND the only one carrying 60% of the independents pretty consistently.
Again, the reasons why he always beat Trump by a WIDER margin (including in polls up until November 6) is because voters like him, they liked his solutions better than "durrr we should do more of the same", and independents saw him as a genuine person (compared to the other 2 "lesser evil" life-long crooks and swindlers).
Healing can happen if the Clintons ride off into the sunset, if the Debbie Wasserman Schultz and corrupt DNC hacks get purged because of their affront to American democracy during the 2016 primaries, and if Democrats turn away from being merely the "socially conscientious" corporate whores in the last 40 years... and turn back into New Deal FDR Democrats (what Bernie and his progressives are), because American workers desperately need the support against the big money interests that get all the favors in our country.
Theonik
Member
Or better yet 'The Deplorabook'
Lights and Waves
Member
This thread is a sobering reminder that no, NeoGAF isn't as cool of a place as the gaming side would make you think it is, and there are still plenty of ass-hats on here.
El_Tiguere
Member
Mine is NOT a dig against women AT ALL (I champion a black strong woman to be our nominee for 2020).
My gripe with the Clintons is that they are political swindlers of the worst grotesque kind. Their dynasty of crooks need to bounce out of here.
It's gross how this is being used to dismiss criticism of Clinton.
Arrogant Bastard
Banned
My apologies to Tig, he isn't the socialist.
You two are shit are recognizing satire and understanding the basis of the article.
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=1408878
You two are shit are recognizing satire and understanding the basis of the article.
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=1408878
Steve Youngblood
Member
It was just a cute link to reference in regards to asking Hillary to leave the limelight. Just to be clear I'll note that you're barking up the wrong tree if you think I'm going to bite on a debate about Hillary's future role in the party. My entire angle here is just wanting to move the fuck on from the 2016 general and primaries. Any clarification tacked on with regards to "we'll move on when (insert hot take about the 2016 election) is addressed" is not something I'm interested in engaging.
Oh god, he's one of those selfish people who was so bitter over the fact that more people wanted Hillary as president than Bernie, so he stayed home and didn't vote on Election Day?
Arrogant Bastard
Banned
Nope confusing posters.
Yup, and makes crazy claims about the primaries being R1GGD!!! against Bernie and uses crazy conspiracy theories to validate his claims.
El_Tiguere
Member
Bad news buddy... it's not just me who has such a tainted view of Democrats (what's the latest... 12% overall support for the old set of crooks in Congress?). Keep counting on that 48% of fellow loyalist card-holding members supporting whatever crook corporations can rely on to continue their gravy train. Americans want different, and they rejected Clinton (especially the 40% that stayed home).
The only way to move forward is for Democrats to become pro-worker New Deal Democrats like Bernie. Or damn BUST because Americans are on the verge of collapse from corporate cartels running wild with our "democracy".
At least get it right...
Maiden Voyage
Gold™ Member
If you criticize the queen, you are either a Trump voter or you didn't vote. You can't criticize something and still like it.
Arrogant Bastard
Banned
They rejected Bernie first man, but you seemingly cannot see that.
That doesn't change the fact that you're selfish and put your pride over the well-being of other people.
Disgusting.
Lights and Waves
Member
Arrogant Bastard
Banned
Really? No shit?
There is a difference between criticizing her which I have done, plenty of people have done and saying that the Clinton had failing health, worked with the DNC to rig the primary, destroyed Hati, and all kinds of other conspiracy crap.
No shit it's satire my fellow bastard
Similar threads
- Locked