Support NeoGAF

[tuxfool]

I feel like taking the minority vote for granted is a superior strategy than the one that Hilary Clinton implemented in 2016. She lost all the key states because the white lower/middle class men and women didn't vote for her. That's why we have Donald Trump. Now we're stuck with an EPA administrator that is a climate change denier, and a possible conservative supreme court for the next several decades.

Here you are whining about Hillary Clinton's campaign strategy and yet your instincts are so fucking dumb. You should stop, every comment in this thread is stupider by the minute.


It would be fine for a REPUBLICAN to do this, not a Democrat, as can be clearly seen by Bernie's failure.

 

[excelsiorlef]

It means that future progressive presidential candidate should focus on white lower/middle class people during their election run. After they win, implement policies which positively benefit ALL peoples, especially the disadvantaged minorities.

But during that election, it seems that catering to the whites wins the day.

Who is the democratic base in your opinion?

Without looking it up tell me when you think the last time the Democrats won the white vote please.

 

[Angelus Errare]

I feel like taking the minority vote for granted is a superior strategy than the one that Hilary Clinton implemented in 2016. She lost all the key states because the white lower/middle class men and women didn't vote for her. That's why we have Donald Trump. Now we're stuck with an EPA administrator that is a climate change denier, and a possible conservative supreme court for the next several decades.

How did that work for Bernie?

 

[Chumley]

This thread is fucked.

 

[cartographer]

While Democrats get in fights about the fake idea that you can only appeal to minorities or only appeal to white people, the Republicans laugh as they get ready to strip away more freedoms and run this country into the ground for their personal profit.

It will be nice when Democrats get over that falsehood. I hope it doesn't take getting demolished in 2018 and 2020 for that to happen. And I really hope people who matter when it comes to strategy and campaigning aren't caught up in the same bullshit.

 

[CrocMother]

In a world where black people are literally being gunned down in the streets by police who barely get a slap on the wrist if anything and the candidate for president barely says fucking shit about it... taking their vote for granted is superior.

In my opinion what we just witnessed was taking their vote for granted. Now people want the democratic party to actively say "fuck minorities."

Whatever wins federal control of the government. It doesn't seem like catering to minorities does that. Donald Trump being our president is proof enough. I just want an EPA head who isn't a climate change denier, and a supreme court that isn't stuck in the 20th century.

If catering to minorities during a presidential election did that, I'd be all for it. It just seems that the guy who did everything to turn off minorities and cater to whites won. So I'm pro whatever strategy it is that wins the White House back to the liberal party.

 

[Aaronology]

Fucking children that think burning bridges will win elections.

Be the change you want to see is the mantra I'm running with right now.

This is an aggravating topic for a lot of us but what keeps my frustration down at certain vocal elements is imagining a gang of alt right trolls laughing at the in-fighting going on. It's sad, and contributing to it gets none of us anywhere good. Getting upset at overly hyperbolic negative opinions of Hillary Clinton is silly; The woman will be better off than all the people castigating her in this thread, bruised ego and all. The important question is how to move forward without alienating people who we will ultimately need to align our votes with to defeat the GOP going forward.

Why exactly are the supposed pragmatists defending Clinton?

Hi.

She is a proven loser.

Yes. She was defeated in 2016. I took it pretty hard. But my reasons for supporting her have not changed because of that defeat. I am disappointed in several errors her campaign made, absolutely, but I also acknowledge the significant external factors that contributed to that defeat. I don't think it's fair I should be expected to abandon my support for Clinton on account of her failed campaign when I still very much believe in the platform she ran on. I don't see anyone else running from the candidates in 2016 who similarly lost their political contests.

Ultimately the main reason Clinton is so abhorred is because she cleared the field of other candidates.

Any Democrat that made the political decision not to challenge her out of fear of losing is not a candidate I would have wanted to support to begin with for a job that requires one have the skill to face extreme political opposition as a matter of course. The candidates who failed to defeat her ran their own error laden campaigns, which is another topic.

 

[RDreamer]

Whatever wins federal control of the government. It doesn't seem like catering to minorities does that. Donald Trump being our president is proof enough. I just want an EPA head who isn't a climate change denier, and a supreme court that isn't stuck in the 20th century.

If catering to minorities during a presidential election did that, I'd be all for it. It just seems that the guy who did everything to turn off minorities and cater to whites won. So I'm pro whatever strategy it is that wins the White House back to the liberal party.

No one catered to minorities.

Aren't you just saying that Democrats should be racists if that works?

 

[Alucrid]

Whatever wins federal control of the government. It doesn't seem like catering to minorities does that. Donald Trump being our president is proof enough. I just want an EPA head who isn't a climate change denier, and a supreme court that isn't stuck in the 20th century.

If catering to minorities during a presidential election did that, I'd be all for it. It just seems that the guy who did everything to turn off minorities and cater to whites won. So I'm pro whatever strategy it is that wins the White House back to the liberal party.

talk about being sold down the river

 

[The Technomancer]

While Democrats get in fights about the fake idea that you can only appeal to minorities or only appeal to white people, the Republicans laugh as they get ready to strip away more freedoms and run this country into the ground for their personal profit.

It will be nice when Democrats get over that falsehood. I hope it doesn't take getting demolished in 2018 and 2020 for that to happen. And I really hope people who matter when it comes to strategy and campaigning aren't caught up in the same bullshit.

You can appeal to minorities and some white people

But there is a very real ceiling on how many white people you can appeal to while also appealing to minorities, because there are a lot of white people who are actively hostile to helping minorities

 

[God Dayumm]

I feel like taking the minority vote for granted is a superior strategy than the one that Hilary Clinton implemented in 2016. She lost all the key states because the white lower/middle class men and women didn't vote for her. That's why we have Donald Trump. Now we're stuck with an EPA administrator that is a climate change denier, and a possible conservative supreme court for the next several decades.

Not necessarily. That will only result in minorities not going out to vote at all. A good candidate will satisfy everyone, otherwise he or she is not worthy of being president.

 

[Blader]

When the Senate voted 77-23 in favor of the AUMF for Iraq, it was indeed Hillary Clinton who cast the deciding vote.

I feel like taking the minority vote for granted is a superior strategy than the one that Hilary Clinton implemented in 2016. She lost all the key states because the white lower/middle class men and women didn't vote for her. That's why we have Donald Trump. Now we're stuck with an EPA administrator that is a climate change denier, and a possible conservative supreme court for the next several decades.

I think you should take a couple extra seconds to re-read what you're writing before you hit post.

 

[Brinbe]

I still don't get where anyone gets this stupid fucking idea that Hillary only catered to minorities or something. Is it because she paid attention to them at all? Are some of you that fucking dense?

This was from fucking 2015 http://www.nytimes.com/politics/fir...diction-after-learning-scale-of-problem/?_r=0
http://www.agri-pulse.com/Clinton-lays-out-four-part-plan-for-rural-America-08262015.asp

But yes, she never talked about or cared about rural America... Fuck outta here.

 

[Principate]

minorities, please take a lump for the greater good. again.

Eh, this has never needed to be the case. Just because you campaign on something doesn't mean you have to focus or do anything at all about it once in power. The right has perfected this strategy to fine art. Why exactly do minorities need to the forefront of a campaign they're called minorities for a reason they make up a smaller proportion of the voting base. What exactly is stopping you from campaigning on white middle and lower classes and focusing on minority rights during term. If you think would not get white middle class to vote for you next election by doing this you weren't going to get elected in the first place. I'm a minority but this purity test on how to campaign fairly illogical if you actually plan to win. The right is playing an entirely different game, while you shouldn't play the same one certain tactics will need to be used to win

 

[Deepwater]

Whatever wins federal control of the government. It doesn't seem like catering to minorities does that. Donald Trump being our president is proof enough. I just want an EPA head who isn't a climate change denier, and a supreme court that isn't stuck in the 20th century.

If catering to minorities during a presidential election did that, I'd be all for it. It just seems that the guy who did everything to turn off minorities and cater to whites won. So I'm pro whatever strategy it is that wins the White House back to the liberal party.

You are strangely bent towards shortchanging minorities when it benefits you

Not just you, but a lot of people in this thread

 

[Aaronology]

Whatever wins federal control of the government. It doesn't seem like catering to minorities does that.

How are minorities being catered to, specifically?

Please elaborate.

 

[The Technomancer]

I still don't get where anyone gets this stupid fucking idea that Hillary only catered to minorities or something. Is it because she paid attention to them at all? Are some of you that fucking dense?

This was from fucking 2015 http://www.nytimes.com/politics/fir...diction-after-learning-scale-of-problem/?_r=0

Yes

 

[Poor GRIMES]

Whatever wins federal control of the government. It doesn't seem like catering to minorities does that. Donald Trump being our president is proof enough. I just want an EPA head who isn't a climate change denier, and a supreme court that isn't stuck in the 20th century.

If catering to minorities during a presidential election did that, I'd be all for it. It just seems that the guy who did everything to turn off minorities and cater to whites won. So I'm pro whatever strategy it is that wins the White House back to the liberal party.

have you ever taken pause and wondered why so many European nations have progressive policies in place? It's because their overly homogenous nations don't allow them to think about how the "other" is also benefitting from their policies. Add in diversity, some bigotry, and a whole lot of ignorance, and that boils down to your average White voter in America.

 

[Madness]

That's fine. Her inability to run a competent campaign doomed an entire country, so please, go away.

She destroyed her rivals in the democratic primaries and won the US popular vote. Save the faux outrage. So many hypocrites and fake people posting their hate for her. You act like Bernie wouldn't have been blown the fuck away by Donald Trump either and I supported Bernie more than Hillary. In a campaign marred by foreign influence leaking internal documents, an inept media who is so far removed from the average voter, a dysfunctional DNC, and a firebrand demogogue willing to say out loud what a lot of racist shitheads have wanted to say for a while, saying she doomed the country is laughable. She did well in debates, she did not expect FBI directors to break ranks and hold press conferences for 'itsfuckingnothing.gif'

It just showed me it wasn't Hillary that doomed the country but democratic voters who ignored all the warning signs. I would post here sometimes about Republicans voting in high numbers in primaries don't be complacent and people would write back this is a sure shot she has the demographics. People would say don't underestimate the Brexit effect and people would say it couldn't happen here. People would post how literally no one in their Texas community is voting Hillary and yet people would say Texas may go blue. If polls came out showing the race tightening, Hillary voters and fans would say its a media conspiracy to make the vote seem close to sell ratings and views etc.

 

[guek]

Whatever wins federal control of the government. It doesn't seem like catering to minorities does that. Donald Trump being our president is proof enough. I just want an EPA head who isn't a climate change denier, and a supreme court that isn't stuck in the 20th century.

If catering to minorities during a presidential election did that, I'd be all for it. It just seems that the guy who did everything to turn off minorities and cater to whites won. So I'm pro whatever strategy it is that wins the White House back to the liberal party.

Hillary's loss can be attributed to a multitude of factors. Singling out everything the the GOP and Trump did and assuming those are the winning strategy for the Dems is a very misguided approach. Simply speaking, you don't really know what you're talking about at all.

That's not to say Hillary ran a good campaign, she didn't, but you're painting with too broad of a brush here as you have with your emotions this entire thread. Slow your roll, dude.

 

[Abounder]

What the hell?

Bush and Cheney caused the Iraq War.

Racists caused Trump.

So?

That was a fast edit, but no I'm not working for Russia/FBI but I am a lifelong Dem voter.

Anyway Hillary votes for wars. She is also bffs with the Bushes and Kissingers.

Clinton barely campaigned compared to Barrack, Bill, or even the novice Trump. She lost because she didn't show up, but to be fair she shouldn't have been allowed to run in the fist place with her all time low ratings and having the FBI on her ass.

nice, you know two things about hillary clinton

It is her legacy after all, good riddance to the superpredator war queen that didn't work hard vs Trump:

 

[CrocMother]

No one catered to minorities.

Aren't you just saying that Democrats should be racists if that works?

Yes. Whatever works.

We have to fight Climate Change yesterday. And yet we are stuck with an executive leader that doesn't even acknowledge it. We are in a horrible position right now, and are going to be decades behind where we should be by the time Trump's presidency is over.

 

[cartographer]

You can appeal to minorities and some white people

But there is a very real ceiling on how many white people you can appeal to while also appealing to minorities, because there are a lot of white people who are actively hostile to helping minorities

And that's much more nuanced than the "abandon minorities, only white people" and "abandon white people, only minorities" absolutes that dozens of these threads are filled with.

 

[royalan]

Roy, you gotten give more than that. Stop thinking Obama can do everyone's job. A lot of people have jobs but fell for that whole 'just the worst' sing and dance. Republicans go out and win seats, against all odds.

Thinking the party is top heavy will hurt in the long run and no young Democrats are waiting to take over. How is that Obama's fault?

You want me to come better than that but explain the numbers.

It's not Obama's job to manually run the DNC, but that does not make him entirely separate from it, or completely absolve his administration from supporting it. That's just how it works.

 

[gutter_trash]

lots of harsh words in here.

 

[StormKing]

Taking the minority vote for granted results in low turnout. Low turnout results in a lost election. It's not a good strategy.

It's better to show up everywhere and address the working class everywhere.

 

[DontBeThatGuy]

You can appeal to minorities and some white people

But there is a very real ceiling on how many white people you can appeal to while also appealing to minorities, because there are a lot of white people who are actively hostile to helping minorities

There's a reason Obama kept it more hush hush on race-issues during campaigning. He didn't wanna offend those types of folks, or rile up an entirely new subset.

Obama got more involved in these issues after 2012, and lets just say that 4 years is a lot of time for a lot of people to start feeling a certain way.

 

[RustyNails]

Whatever wins federal control of the government. It doesn't seem like catering to minorities does that. Donald Trump being our president is proof enough. I just want an EPA head who isn't a climate change denier, and a supreme court that isn't stuck in the 20th century.

If catering to minorities during a presidential election did that, I'd be all for it. It just seems that the guy who did everything to turn off minorities and cater to whites won. So I'm pro whatever strategy it is that wins the White House back to the liberal party.

What are you trying to say? I think I know but I'd like more clarification. Are you saying Hillary should be more craven?

 

[Cipherr]

I feel like taking the minority vote for granted is a superior strategy

Booooy I can't wait until you and the people who think like you wake up one day and decide to stop pretending, and just head on home. There's a tailor made political party for you in this country. They looooove blaming us minorities for everything that goes wrong, and love them some good ol' fashioned Clinton hate. You would fit right in.

 

[hydragonwarrior]

I don't want to relitigate the primary, but people still seem to want to string Hillary Clinton up and blame her for the combined problems of the Democratic Party as a whole. And I'm a firm believer in being angry at the right people for the right reasons.

Anybody want a sobering thought?

Over the last 8 years, the Democratic Party has lost, oh, let's see...

--11 governorships
--13 Senate seats
--69 House seats
--913 (that's a 9 and a 1 and a 3) local legislative seats
--30 state legislative seats

http://www.politifact.com/punditfac...emocrats-lost-900-seats-state-legislatures-o/

That's a whole damn lot. And who's been at the top of the party the last 8 years? THESE fools here:

The Democratic Party has been DECIMATED over the last 8 years, and it was all under the watch of the Obama administration. It was Obama's fault for being naive. Obama's fault for restricting the DNC from accepting money from corporate donors (bet most of you guys didn't know about that, though), which while noble, without contingency insured that Democrats would be outspent by Republicans locally hand over fist. It was Obama's fault for not trusting the established DNC machine, leaving the longstanding members responsible for keeping that machinery running to retire without competent replacements. It was Obama's fault for never playing up his accomplishments, for always expecting the results to speak for themselves, and letting Republicans control the narrative. This left local D candidates without anything to run on, and made it possible for idiots like this to exist in great number:



The Obama Administration absolutely failed the Democratic Party on the local level but I don't see anybody in this thread telling Obama and Biden to fuck off (although their style of apathetic, turn-the-other-cheek politics really do need to fuck completely off). Because they're the Good Ol' Boys, and Good Ol' Boys never do wrong. Let's just blame Hillary. It's like Trump said in the first debate, Why not?

But let's not pretend at legitimate soul searching here while thinking that the key to Democrats getting their shit together is laying any and all blame at the feet of Hillary Clinton. It's tired.

I'm not saying that Hillary Clinton is completely without blame. I don't even think Hillary Clinton would say that. But let's just call this exactly what it is: a witch hunt that just won't fucking die.

THANK YOU ROYALAN. There's much more to this than just one person losing the election. Which is why I started the other thread - what can the DNC do to address this mess, not from the very top (the presidency) but from the very bottom as well.

Hell, I bet at this point most democratic voters will forget to vote again in the next two years.

 

[Blader]

Eh, this has never needed to be the case. Just because you campaign on something doesn't mean you have to focus or do anything at all about it once in power. The right has perfect strategy to fine art. Why exactly do minorities need to the forefront of a campaign they're called minorities for a reason they make up a smaller proportion of the voting base. What exactly is stopping you from campaigning on white middle and lower classes and focusing on minority rights during term. If you think would get white middle class to not vote for you next election you weren't going to get elected in the first place. I'm a minority but this purity test on how to campaign fairly illogical if you actually plan to win. The right is playing an entirely different game, while you should play the same one certain tactics will need to be used to win

The GOP always wins the white voting bloc. A Democrat that campaigns to whites and ignores minorities in the meantime will lose.

 

[ISOM]

I still don't get where anyone gets this stupid fucking idea that Hillary only catered to minorities or something. Is it because she paid attention to them at all? Are some of you that fucking dense?

This was from fucking 2015 http://www.nytimes.com/politics/fir...diction-after-learning-scale-of-problem/?_r=0

But yes, she never talked about or cared about rural America... Fuck outta here.

Yeah, this is such BS revisionist history. And people have allowed and even bought into due to the fact that Trump's overtly racist campaign appealed to whites. People don't want to say it but that's what happened.

 

[ItWasMeantToBe19]

I still don't get where anyone gets this stupid fucking idea that Hillary only catered to minorities or something. Is it because she paid attention to them at all? Are some of you that fucking dense?

This was from fucking 2015 http://www.nytimes.com/politics/fir...diction-after-learning-scale-of-problem/?_r=0

But yes, she never talked about or cared about rural America... Fuck outta here.

Trump's entire last two months of the campaign was talking about Hillary's leaked emails and his main message of the campaign is that she should be in prison for...... poor email protocol.

Obviously rural America is deadly focused on persecution of poor email protocols and that's what we need to care about.

Seriously, guys. "LOCK HER UP!!!!" was right up there with "MEXICO WILL PAY FOR THE WALL!!!" as the most frequent cries at Trump's rallies. It wasn't stuff about jobs, lol.

 

[Apt101]

I wouldn't expect anyone in her position to run again.

Yep. She lost what should have been a shoo-in to a cartoon character of a man. Granted, she won the popular vote by a large margin. She'll always have that at least.

 

[kamineko]

I wish her luck, whatever she does.

Lol some of these weird comments. Clinton mainly lost because (1) white racists turned out and also because (2) the left in America has fucking less than zero discipline. We'd rather argue with each-other than work on winning.

Clinton could have picked the next Supreme Court Justice, but folks would rather live with that kind of shit than compromise. When same-sex marriage gets overturned, lofty principles aren't going to comfort the disenfranchised.

 

[gutter_trash]

There's a reason Obama kept it more hush hush on race-issues during campaigning. He didn't wanna offend those types of folks, or rile up an entirely new subset.

Obama got more involved in these issues after 2012, and lets just say that 4 years is a lot of time for a lot of people to start feeling a certain way.

he learned quickly after that "cling to their guns and religion" sound byte and never repeated it ever again

 

[The Technomancer]

he learned quickly after that "cling to their guns and religion" sound byte and never repeated it ever again

I'm very curious how we're going to feel about the deplorables comment two years from now

 

[Principate]

The GOP always wins the white voting bloc. A Democrat that campaigns to whites and ignores minorities in the meantime will lose.

They don't need to win the white block they just need the blue collar block that were loyal to them.

 

[cartographer]

Yep. She lost what should have been a shoo-in to a cartoon character of a man. Granted, she won the popular vote by a large margin. She'll always have that at least.

Sadly that means absolutely nothing in practical terms for the millions of Americans who will and are facing direct negative consequences of her campaign's loss.

But at least she can feel good about it I guess?

 

[CrocMother]

What are you trying to say? I think I know but I'd like more clarification. Are you saying Hillary should be more craven?

I'm saying whatever it takes to win that executive veto/supreme court election power, DO IT.

Hilary obviously went about it the wrong way, Trump the right way.

That power is so important not only to the future of this country but the future of this planet, that whatever it takes, we have to do it.

 

[gutter_trash]

I'm very curious how we're going to feel about the deplorables comment two years from now

well this thread is full of them

 

[excelsiorlef]

Yes. Whatever works.

We have to fight Climate Change yesterday. And yet we are stuck with an executive leader that doesn't even acknowledge it. We are in a horrible position right now, and are going to be decades behind where we should be by the time Trump's presidency is over.

I ask again who do you think the Democratic base is?

And I ask again when do you think (without cheating and looking it up) the Democrats last won the white vote...

 

[Mr. Blonde]

This isn't surprising. Major parties don't renominate someone for the WH after they lose anymore.

 

[Aaronology]

I'm saying whatever it takes to win that executive veto/supreme court election power, DO IT.

Hilary obviously went about it the wrong way, Trump the right way.

That power is so important not only to the future of this country but the future of this planet, that whatever it takes, we have to do it.

How were minorities catered to, CrocMother?

 

[tuxfool]

This isn't surprising. Major parties don't renominate someone for the WH after they lose anymore.

This wasn't for the white house. It was speculation for mayor of NY.

 

[Deepwater]

Can I ask why people are still debating about appealing to white voters when the election was decided over 40,000 some odd votes in swing states with rampant voter disenfranchisement going on? Like, I'm so confused.

 

[StormKing]

he learned quickly after that "cling to their guns and religion" sound byte and never repeated it ever again

Which is why it's confusing that Clinton chose to call half of Trump supporters deplorables. It's not something that you'd expect any sensible politician to do.

 

[Boudica]

No. It's because of 63 million idiots who voted for Donald Trump that we have that.

Blame the people who voted for trump.

Or better yet, the so called progressives who decided that because their candidate of choice didn't get the nomination, they'd rather hand over the country to an orange idiot.

"His presidency won't affect me personally that much!"

 

[KO Traveling Hobo]

You can appeal to minorities and some white people

But there is a very real ceiling on how many white people you can appeal to while also appealing to minorities, because there are a lot of white people who are actively hostile to helping minorities

I know it's easy to get cynical after this election, but I think you underestimate the height of that ceiling for the average white person.

 

[DontBeThatGuy]

I'm very curious how we're going to feel about the deplorables comment two years from now

It was a fuck up, no other way to look at it anymore.