• 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.
  • The Politics forum has been nuked. Please do not bring political discussion to the rest of the site, or you will be removed. Thanks.

The final staff letter of the Hillary Clinton Presidential Campaign

Status
Not open for further replies.

Ziltoidia 9

Member
Jul 1, 2013
5,451
0
430
Lewisville, TX
I will agree that Comey hurt her. But again many concerns were raised during the primaries about the stupid email server and all where ignored or brushed off.

She handled the entire thing stupid as fuck. She knew she was planning on running, she knew it was shady, she knew shit was coming out and the FBI was going on a witch hunt.

No big deal though, nobody cares! Well it turns out people care a lot more about potential national security issues than "locker room talk"

This, and, Obama was also an anti-establishment figure. Thats why he won the primary in 2008 and people still had enough hope in him during 2012. But then if you have "the" dem establishment (the same one that helped inact trade laws that hurt your communities, both white and black) come in and ride on the coat tails of Obama, people get turned off. Take the "public vs private message" thing. The issue was hardly refuted by the Hillary campaign, and in the debate it was mentioned for a few seconds and she didn't really give a good answer. She just deflected to Russia. Russia is a separate issue.
 

Madness

Banned
Jan 1, 2013
22,118
0
0
Lots of users were really drinking the koolaid and anyone that even mentioned anything negative about her were jumped on.

Very. And it is crazy now to see so many predicting about how easy it will be to elect someone iver Trump in 4 years. A sitting president always has an advantage unless the other side has its game on point and elects someone who can secure a lot of people from the other side. Going to be interesting going forward what happens. If Trump sticks to his campaign promises, the other side won't secure his side of the vote and people will happily let him continue another 4 years, otherwise he will be a one term president. "Read my lips, no new taxes" etc.
 

Principate

Saint Titanfall
Dec 17, 2011
16,559
0
570
Easier to blame this on her instead of fess up that there is something fundamentally wrong with this country to elect a white supremacist.

There's nothing to fess up most posters in this forum are fully aware that something is fundamentally wrong with America, that's why there's police shooting and all sorts of America related bullshit constantly on here. There's nothing new about that. What is new is that Hillary lost a perfectly winnable election due to incompetence. I can assure you Obama would of lost this election had he ran, because people are turn up to vote for and in spite of all the shit flung at him still has high favourability ratings.
 

Faddy

Banned
Apr 30, 2008
4,253
0
0
There are certainly more issues than Comey's meddling, but make no mistake, this was a pretty close election in PA, MI, WI. I have very little doubt she would've closely won had the FBI not interfered. Those 3 states' electoral votes would've given the DNC the presidency.


Yes she may have managed a narrow victory if the Comey letter didn't surface but she was running against Donald Trump and should have been on track for a landslide. But she didn't work hard enough to earn people's vote and was ignorant to her problems in the rust belt.

Let's say she won Florida and North Carolina to give her 272 EVs. It would still have been a disaster as the ineffective democratic campaign could not turn the Senate. Dems lost races in Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, North Carolina, Ohio, Florida and Indiana which were all on Hillary's board as states she wanted to win.
 

MHWilliams

Member
Oct 18, 2013
12,369
0
0
www.usgamer.net
This forum's turn on Clinton is absolutely unreal.

Given the outcome and lack of accountability, it's unsurprising.

This is what bothered me the most. Mods stood by and did nothing while people blatantly violated the terms of service. Those threads were the exact opposite of civil discussions.

Our strongest Sanders and Trump supporters are still here and posting.

Once again, you want to talk about moderation, PM a mod. Not really up for discussion otherwise.
 

squallheart

Member
Dec 16, 2013
360
302
630
Actually I remember this.

To be honest I stopped posting in political threads for the most part after the primaries (hell even late april), and when I did post, I tried to just focus on Trump or to just ask for the in-fighting to stop.

My opinion is and always will be, parts of the Dem followers got so used to using attacks of racism and sexism against the GOP that they started to use it against anyone that wasn't with the establishment.

This happened to me as well. I was for Bernie and was the person who convinced me to vote for the first time (33). Then people said u don't want Hillary cause she's a woman etc. Even after Bernie lost I voted for her though not very motivated by it but my friend convinced to vote. I knew she was going to loose though cause she came off as the establishment.
 

fantomena

Member
Jun 1, 2013
15,030
498
680
A lot of people voted for Hillary solely because she's not Trump. Now that she failed at the one job they cared about--keeping Trump out of office--there's nothing left to be positive about.

Yeah, I heard lots of people who got interviewed on election day saying they mostly voted AGAINST someone rather than FOR someone (i.e. Trump).
 
Apr 30, 2009
35,156
0
0
You were also at risk of banning if you stood your ground against those smears. Really wasnt a good time to discuss politics at all.

You were also at risk of a banning if you posted conspiracy theories about how Hillary killed Vince Foster and was too shrill, it was so sad.

Hillary lost because people thought she was a criminal even though she did nothing wrong. The fact that emails was an 18 month story is a fucking joke. She didn't do much, if anything, wrong aside from running the first place. She could never convince people that she wasn't a crook because people had already made up their minds that she killed those people in Benghazi.
 

borghe

Loves the Greater Toronto Area
Jun 18, 2004
23,394
3
1,575
www.borgh.us
first take away, this is directly from her campaign, not the DNC.. yes the DNC thread is also embarrasing.. but the embarrassing nature of this letter has nothing to do with that.

second take away, reading this I now realize the utter and complete failure of Clinton and the people surrounding her.

how could we have gotten it so wrong :( I feel utterly foolish (to be correct, I voted for Sanders in the primary, and he won my state WI)

As much as I think Trump will work to chip away at this country, I can't even be mad at people for not voting Hillary on moral standing. Absolutely out of touch with the people she would have led.

You were also at risk of a banning if you posted conspiracy theories about how Hillary killed Vince Foster and was too shrill, it was so sad.

Hillary lost because people thought she was a criminal even though she did nothing wrong. The fact that emails was an 18 month story is a fucking joke. She didn't do much, if anything, wrong aside from running the first place. She could never convince people that she wasn't a crook because people had already made up their minds that she killed those people in Benghazi.
ehh.... I would really hold up there. She DID do wrong.. Anyone else even remotely in her situation on the email server has been previously and almost certainly would have been charged and sentenced. Yes Comey declined to indict, but even many of her more ardent supporters responded to that with "Well I don't know how she isn't charged, but officially it can now be said it was decided that she didn't do anything criminal"

so yeah... she is in absolute fact not a convicted criminal. But saying she didn't do anything wrong is.. well just flat out false. anyone else in similar situations in the government have been tried and convicted.
 

Bowdz

Member
May 1, 2011
5,196
1
0
The comparison of Hillary's August schedule versus Obama's is pretty telling. She spent all of August in MA, CA, and NY sans one stop in NV and once she got underway campaigning in full, she'd never campaign outside of metropolitan areas (Philly, Pittsburgh, Detroit, Cleveland, Columbus, etc). Meanwhile, Obama campaigned in rural PA, OH, WI, and MI all while not abandoning his core beliefs about social equality for all and he won handjly. Yes, we need an honest, inspirational candidate going forward and we must NEVER abandon our belief in equality for all people, but the fact is just making the effort sometimes pays off. Go to the communities that are effected regardless of region or political affiliation and just make the effort to listen and talk to voters. They may loath you and your platform, they may heckle and jeer, and hell, you don't even need to change your platform to accommodate them, but you have to make the effort.

The global political climate is establishment vs. anti establishment. Nothing comes off as more establishment or elite as not having the guts to go to communities (that have large numbers of Democratic supporters), look them in the eye, and talk about your plans for the country and their communities. The sad truth is that when you don't make the effort to connect or communicate, you create a vacuum that can sadly be filled by hateful, fearful rhetoric as we have seen. It doesn't have to be permanent, but we have to make the effort going forward.
 

bionic77

Member
Jun 7, 2004
58,286
1
0
There's nothing to fess up most posters in this forum are fully aware that something is fundamentally wrong with America, that's why there's police shooting and all sorts of America related bullshit constantly on here. There's nothing new about that. What is new is that Hillary lost a perfectly winnable election due to incompetence. I can assure you Obama would of lost this election had he ran, because people are turn up to vote for and in spite of all the shit flung at him still has high favourability ratings.
Guys like Obama don't come along very often.

She definitely lost something that she could have won but it is a national embarrassment that it was close and a disaster that she lost.
 

orthodoxy1095

Banned
Dec 15, 2013
25,270
0
0
twitter.com
- She didn't campaign in PA, WI and MI because ALL polls had her up by a comfortable margin.
They should have been doing more tracking to make sure Rs weren't coming home to roost after moping about Trump. It was an obvious possibility at the very least.
- You dont campaign in blue states when you can campaign in traditional swing states like Ohio and Florida. And She campaigned there a lot.
An intelligent candidate wouldn't spend weeks in New York, Massachusetts and California either. But there she was.
- She should have done more tracking polls but all polls had her up anyway. The money was better spent in ads.
That's a foolish way to view polls. "I'm up now, so I won't bother with more." She and her staff of all people, with the combined experience in politics they had, should have understood the volatility of the electorate. Especially when things kept hitting her, it should have been obvious, "maybe it's time to check in."
- Her ads were great at making Trump look like a vile racist fool. Americans just ignored it. Blame them.
Trying to get people to vote against a candidate rather than giving a persuasive message about why to vote for you is ultimately a foolish method. The lack of reaction for over a year to all the dumb shit Trump said should have made that clear.
- She won every debate and destroyed him in the last debate. Americans ignored this. Blame them.
While the impact of Presidential debates is a point of debate itself, historically, there has been at least a bit of movement in the polls afterwards. If they didn't move for her, which I honestly don't remember if that's true, that says more about her than about the electorate.

- Blame the polls for getting it so wrong. Campaigns live and die by polls. If the polls had her up then you cant fault her for trusting the polls. If she HADNT trusted the polls and went to traditionally blue states like MI and WI instead of focusing on Ohio and Florida, everyone would've blamed her for not focusing on swing states.
I can fault her and the campaign for not doing due diligence to determine if traditional polls were going to be as useful to understanding this crazy election and candidate. And for cutting their internal tracking a month out.
- Someone in Wisconsin said, we wanted to see her and we voted for the racist scumbag because she didnt come and coddle us and tuck us in bed. Dont buy into this. Running a few campaign events into Winsconsin isnt going to convince selfish apathetic white people to all of a sudden vote for her. They had plenty of time to see her during the debates. They went for the guy who got creamed in the debates. Fuck them.
This is where I'm going to stop. Your mentality of "fuck them" is exactly why she lost.

That you can't see that is why the party is fated to go through this again and again and again and again until they learn their lesson. Wisconsin is a great example. Here's a this tweet I saw earlier today.



All of those candidates gave enough of a damn to try to excude the mere appearance of caring about the state, campaigning there and the hearing the issues of those 13 counties. Hillary didn't, and her campaign got what it deserved.
 

Blader

Member
Oct 8, 2006
50,641
0
0
I get how you can blame the first FBI letter, but don't see how you can blame the 2nd. The 2nd letter was saying that nothing was found.
It reinforces the idea that Hillary got away with it again. There was nothing the FBI could say on the investigation that didn't feed into people's worst perceptions of her.
 

Principate

Saint Titanfall
Dec 17, 2011
16,559
0
570
first take away, this is directly from her campaign, not the DNC.. yes the DNC thread is also embarrasing.. but the embarrassing nature of this letter has nothing to do with that.

second take away, reading this I now realize the utter and complete failure of Clinton and the people surrounding her.

how could we have gotten it so wrong :( I feel utterly foolish (to be correct, I voted for Sanders in the primary, and he won my state WI)

As much as I think Trump will work to chip away at this country, I can't even be mad at people for not voting Hillary on moral standing. Absolutely out of touch with the people she would have led.
It's astonishing really you fuck over a planet, reverse decades worth of work and progress and the best you do is a fucking PR fluff piece absolving your faults blaming it all un-controllables and listing all the great work you did (despite loosing fucking everything anyway)

They absolutely deserved to lose. Thing is Trump deserved it more and yet they managed to lose to that.
 

Ziltoidia 9

Member
Jul 1, 2013
5,451
0
430
Lewisville, TX
You were also at risk of a banning if you posted conspiracy theories about how Hillary killed Vince Foster and was too shrill, it was so sad.

Hillary lost because people thought she was a criminal even though she did nothing wrong. The fact that emails was an 18 month story is a fucking joke. She didn't do much, if anything, wrong aside from running the first place. She could never convince people that she wasn't a crook because people had already made up their minds that she killed those people in Benghazi.

I don't know. I still think its the economy (stupid). I think the rust belt had enough and were voting for the hope that things would get better for them economically.

As far as the conspiracy theory stuff, If someone wants to post that they think Hillary had someone killed or botched Ben Gahzi, it might show them to be ignorant. There is plenty of other places to communicate about it. I mean, I thought these things were pretty fringe, and I didn't really see any of it (i guess because they were banned).
 

ChouGoku

Member
Dec 15, 2014
2,852
3
415
I voted for Clinton but I kind of am happy that she won't be president. I hate the fact that family members think they have a hold of this country. She thought it was just her turn, so much so that she thought she had the Bernie supporters after insulting them and telling them to grow up, saying she was for the people but continued to raise millions from the elites and special intrests, and she ignored sections of the country because she thought she had it in the bag. Shes an example of the establishment not trying to work for the people's vote but rather telling them just to fall in line and shut the fuck up. I wish I could've been in the room when they announced Trump won, just to see her meltdown because Trump/Comey/whoever ruined her chances to be president because it was her turn.


With all that said I would still much much much rather have her than Trump
 
Nov 17, 2005
45,404
1
1,010
Yes she may have managed a narrow victory if the Comey letter didn't surface but she was running against Donald Trump and should have been on track for a landslide. But she didn't work hard enough to earn people's vote and was ignorant to her problems in the rust belt.

Let's say she won Florida and North Carolina to give her 272 EVs. It would still have been a disaster as the ineffective democratic campaign could not turn the Senate. Dems lost races in Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, North Carolina, Ohio, Florida and Indiana which were all on Hillary's board as states she wanted to win.

Yep.

A slim victory, with no Senate means a 4 year witch-hunt and NOTHING gets approved.

At least if she had won AND flipped the Senate, there would have been some sort of mandate for her.
 

Astaleview

Banned
May 17, 2016
264
0
0
Trump can really help if he ends up getting big money our of politics. Also somebody needs to get into his ear about scrapping the EC.
 

Principate

Saint Titanfall
Dec 17, 2011
16,559
0
570
Guys like Obama don't come along very often.

She definitely lost something that she could have won but it is a national embarrassment that it was close and a disaster that she lost.

Yeah but you didn't need Obama, all you needed was Clinton that was relate able and have closet fulls of skeletons whether manufactured or not
 

GSG Flash

Nobody ruins my family vacation but me...and maybe the boy!
Jul 7, 2004
14,838
0
0
If an ambiguous letter from the FBI made such a big difference, then maybe they should've done a better job to kill the email issue. It's obvious that the emails were a huge red flag for voters, and both her campaign and her supporters(including here on GAF) were waving it off as nothing as if everyone shared their opinion.

Hillary should've never been the candidate with something as big as this email scandal looming over her head. Unfortunately her own ego(the ego that caused this scandal to happen in the first place) and the egos of her campaign and her supporters were too big to have made that decision.
 
Apr 30, 2009
35,156
0
0
Hillary was in Pennsylvania forever and spent tens of millions in Pennsylvania. I don't think campaign visits or ad spending matter at all.

If an ambiguous letter from the FBI made such a big difference, then maybe they should've done a better job to kill the email issue. It's obvious that the emails were a huge red flag for voters, and both her campaign and her supporters(including here on GAF) were waving it off as nothing as if everyone shared their opinion.

Hillary should've never been the candidate with something as big as this email scandal looming over her head. Unfortunately her own ego(the ego that caused this scandal to happen in the first place) and the egos of her campaign and her supporters were too big to have made that decision.

BUT THERE WAS NO SCANDAL.

The emails shit was nothing!

When Hillary tried the eminently sensible “I was following precedent” defense, Politifact dinged her answer as “mostly false” on the grounds that while Powell did use a personal email account, he didn’t use a private email server.

This distinction has attracted a lot of attention. And it’s proven politically damaging — because while lots of people maintain two email addresses and sometimes do work stuff on their personal email, very few Americans use a private email server as opposed to relying on a commercial email service. But legally speaking, this is completely irrelevant. As the State Department inspector general concluded in its report on Clinton’s conduct, the guideline Clinton violated was a principle that “normal day-to-day operations should be conducted on an authorized Automated Information System.”

Using a private server violates that rule, but so would using a Gmail address or simply checking your State.gov email address from your personal laptop rather than a Department-issue one.

But while the use of a private server is legally irrelevant, it’s certainly unusual. And it leaves people wondering: Why did Clinton go out of her way to set up a private server?

Clinton, as you may have heard, is married to former president Bill Clinton, who stepped down from office in January of 2001. Clinton was in the White House throughout the 1990s when the rest of us were being bombarded with AOL signup CD-ROMs, so he didn’t have a personal email when he left. Gmail didn’t exist back then, and his new job was, in effect, running a Bill Clinton startup. He launched a charitable foundation, he established his presidential library, and he made big bucks on speaking tours. He had a staff and he needed IT infrastructure and support. So he paid a guy to set up an email server that he could use.

Hillary Clinton — who is, again, his wife — also set herself up with an account on the same server. This is a bit unusual, but a lot about being married to a former president is unusual. What it’s not is suspicious.

The private server was not a transparency dodge
It’s become a bit of an article of faith among journalists frustrated with public officials’ constant FOIA-dodging that this is all obviously dissimulation and Clinton was really trying to evade the Freedom of Information Act.

Many people, for example, point to the fact that Clinton would routinely travel with multiple digital devices as debunking her supposed convenience argument. But this is silly. I’ve been known to travel with an iPhone, an iPad, a Kindle, and a laptop all at once. That doesn’t mean needing to carry two separate iPhones (one to check my work email and one to check my personal email) wouldn’t be inconvenient. After all, what if I was replying to a work email while a text came in to my personal phone and I wanted to check it.

I’d be left juggling phones and looking like an idiot, exactly how federal employees tended to look in the heyday of the double-fisting phones era.

I would not want to do that. Colin Powell did not want to do that. Hillary Clinton did not want to do that. Because that would be terrible.

By contrast, it’s a terrible solution to a desire to avoid having your emails disclosed to the public via FOIA. One way you can tell it’s a terrible solution is that Hillary Clinton’s work emails have been disclosed to the public. You can read them right here.

The specific timeline is that the House Select Committee on Benghazi requested Clinton’s emails in the summer of 2014, at which point the relevant State Department personnel realized they did not have the emails because Clinton had been using her personal address. State asked Clinton for the emails, and she handed them over later that year. It was only in March of 2015 that the New York Times broke the story of Clinton’s private server in a scoop by Michael Schmidt, which reported that the emails had been handed over to the State Department “two months ago.”

This is fairly clearly not an optimal approach to government record-keeping, as Thomas Blanton of the National Security Archive at George Washington University told Schmidt at the time:

It’s a shame it didn’t take place automatically when she was secretary of state as it should have. Someone in the State Department deserves credit for taking the initiative to ask for the records back. Most of the time it takes the threat of litigation and embarrassment.
According to the Inspector General’s report, Clinton “should have preserved any Federal records she created and received on her personal account by printing and filing those records with the related files in the Office of the Secretary.”

There are two possible interpretations here. One is that Clinton hatched the private email account plan as an elaborate dodge of federal record-keeping laws, but then months before the public became aware of the server’s existence complied with requests to turn them over. The other is that the federal records rule on the book was antiquated and a bit absurd, requiring officials to turn over paper copies of emails for no good reason, and simply got ignored out of sloppiness.

But she deleted 33,000 emails!
Suspicion at this point is then supposed to focus on the fact that she had her lawyers delete more than 30,000 emails from her server.

After Hillary left office, the State Department told her she had to turn all her work-related emails over to them, so she tasked a legal team with determining which emails were work emails and which were not. She turned the work emails over because that’s what she was legally required to do. She deleted the others, presumably because she did not want Trey Gowdy and Jason Chaffetz to rummage through her inbox leaking whatever they happened to find amusing to area journalists.

Now, is it possible that Clinton’s legal team simply decided to entirely disregard the law and delete work-related emails?

In some sense, sure. But there’s no evidence that this happened. Generally speaking, in life we assume it would be moderately difficult to hire a well-known law firm to destroy evidence for you without someone deciding to do the right thing and squeal.

Besides which, it would be almost comically easy to catch Clinton in the act of systematically destroying relevant emails. The vast majority of the work-related email correspondence of an incumbent secretary of state, after all, is going to be correspondence with other government employees. Maybe she shoots a note to the Pentagon about Benghazi, or circulates ideas for a speech draft with her communications team. Any message like that, by definition, would exist on a government server as well as on her private one. This means it would be fully accessible via FOIA and also means that if Clinton’s copy were found to not be in the pile of emails she turned over, she’d be caught red handed.

There is no there there! People thought it was a scandal because they hate her.

http://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2016/11/4/13500018/clinton-email-scandal-bullshit
 

LCGeek

formerly sane
It's amazing what a difference 20/20 hindsight/Monday morning quarterbacking can do.

Keep telling yourself that.

You can go back easily to 2012 and find my disdain for her. She was shitty but people wanted listened to a crowd full of memes who ticked off so many people on both ends along with the candidate and her deplorable line the vote ended up being depressed. Identity politics and saying the other guy is worse isn't a good way to win it's usually a common feature of presidential losers. They choose queen kryptonite.

introspection is a shitty process if that's your method.
 

Juken

Member
Apr 26, 2012
603
0
550
Blaming the Comey stuff kind of feels like blaming a bad call from an umpire after the Yankees lose to a little league team.
 

StrategyFan

Member
Aug 1, 2015
1,656
14
0
Nothing major needs to change. 100,000 voters different in the right place and it was a solid victory. Hillary looks to have won the popular vote too. There is no need for revolution.

sure. nothing needs to change if all you have to do is face unelectable candidates like Donald Trump for the next few decades

what if the GOP nominates someone who isn't viewed as incompetent by 70% of the country? someone who doesn't create a new scandal every week?
 

orthodoxy1095

Banned
Dec 15, 2013
25,270
0
0
twitter.com
Hillary was in Pennsylvania forever and spent tens of millions in Pennsylvania. I don't think campaign visits or ad spending matter at all.
"Forever"?

Of the very little time that she actually spent in PA, she spent most it in Pittsburgh and Philly against the advice of both Bill and Former PA Gov. Rendell. It means jackshit if you spend time in a state in the wrong places.
 
Apr 30, 2009
35,156
0
0
Keep telling yourself that.

You can go back easily to 2012 and find my disdain for her. She was shitty but people wanted listened to a crowd full of memes who ticked off so many people on both ends along with the candidate and her deplorable line the vote ended up being depressed. Identity politics and saying the other guy is worse isn't a good way to win it's usually a common feature of presidential losers. They choose queen kryptonite.

introspection is a shitty process if that's your method.

Literally Trump's entire campaign was identity politics and saying that the other dude was a demon who should be in prison for pouring bleach over boxes of emails.
 

SneakersSO

Member
Aug 20, 2015
3,165
2
325
ain't a damn thing changing folks, democrat voters are going to learn the hard way. I feel it's going to be like when the extreme right got fed up with republicans

That is, sadly, exactly what is going to happen here. Meanwhile, low & middle class voters of all Creed's will be the ones suffering for it while Dems look for that magic angle that will get them elected, all the while they just continue to ignore what the electorate is telling them while they continue to cozy up to the corporate elite and wall Street.
 

Chariot

Member
Jul 6, 2013
27,675
0
475
Hillary was in Pennsylvania forever and spent tens of millions in Pennsylvania. I don't think campaign visits or ad spending matter at all.
Of course it does, it's a bit of a matter in management. Depending and when, how and what you do, you can get different yields. For example, a few visits into the Rust Belts would've come cheap, but would've assured thousands that the democratic party didn't forget them. But stay in New York didn't get many more new votes. Neither did flying home every day.

A running politician visiting can encourage the people who already work for you and could sway undecided ones. It just has diminishing returns, since there are only so many people you can reach. That's why you need to plan how to spread your presence and how much.

edit: as someone else noted. The exact location matters too. Hillary was concentrated on urban areas, but deliberately left out rural ones. Her campaign thought she would pick up more people in the cities than she would lose in the country.
 

GoldenEye 007

Member
Jul 28, 2006
23,805
0
0
The Big D
Nothing major needs to change. 100,000 voters different in the right place and it was a solid victory. Hillary looks to have won the popular vote too. There is no need for revolution.

This isn't 100,000 votes this cycle. It's losing nearly 7 million Democratic votes since 2012. And even more since 2008.

This was basically a mid-term turnout for the Dems, which they always lose. That type of thing cannot happen or the party and progressivism is likely done for the foreseeable future.
 
Apr 30, 2009
35,156
0
0
That is, sadly, exactly what is going to happen here. Meanwhile, low & middle class voters of all Creed's will be the ones suffering for it while Dems look for that magic angle that will get them elected, all the while they just continue to ignore what the electorate is telling them while they continue to cozy up to the corporate elite and wall Street.

Yes, this is why Russ Feingold lost to Ron Johnson, you nailed it.
 

Mammoth Jones

Member
May 5, 2011
21,024
0
710
I love how the only mention of Black voters is their expectation we wouldn't carry them like we always do and an immediate pivot to how they'll just go ahead and compensate for us and keep it moving.

Very telling about their regard and value of Black voters.

This forum's turn on Clinton is absolutely unreal.

Well the pile on to anyone that wasn't 100% pro Clinton is toast so people are actually participating in the discussion.

She deserves every bit of the anger she's getting. Same with the DNC.
 

jmdajr

Member
Dec 12, 2006
58,999
1
0
You know the GOP is going to hammer you, but you also have to put up your own end of the bargain.
 

Bowdz

Member
May 1, 2011
5,196
1
0
Yup. She was in the cities basically. Didn't touch rural anywhere.

Yup. Looking back at her campaign stops is astounding. Never ventured out of the metropolitan areas and then proceeded to lose everything but the metropolitan areas.

Just make the effort.
 

borghe

Loves the Greater Toronto Area
Jun 18, 2004
23,394
3
1,575
www.borgh.us
Nothing major needs to change. 100,000 voters different in the right place and it was a solid victory. Hillary looks to have won the popular vote too. There is no need for revolution.

hillary barely beat the least likable candidate to EVER run on a major party in the general election. to EVER run on a major party.... by 1%. Trump had a likability rating of 37%. Literally 37% of the country (statistically) felt Trump was likable... and she could BARELY beat him in the popular vote? And before you cite "lulz polls", Trump ended up with an estimate of 28% of all eligible voters voting for him. So that 37% number seems entirely feasible.

people cling to this popular vote thing like it's clear proof she ran the better campaign.

you know what it's called when you just barely scrape by past a racist, misogynistic, bigoted xenophobe? It's called "people disliked you slightly less than President Pussy Grabber"

yup, definitely something worth bragging over.
 

Papercuts

fired zero bullets in the orphanage.
Sep 1, 2007
30,406
0
1,015
Pennsylvania
www.neogaf.com
This forum's turn on Clinton is absolutely unreal.

I don't think there's much of a turn, just actual room to breathe without getting dogpiled.

The queen squad funneled into a hole somewhere for the time being for people to actually have discussions for the first time in a good year or so.

The DNC seriously need to learn from this...losing this election is not excusable at all.
 
Nov 17, 2005
45,404
1
1,010
I love how the only mention of Black voters is their expectation we wouldn't carry them like we always do and an immediate pivot to how they'll just go ahead and compensate for us and keep it moving.

Very telling about their regard and value of Black voters.

Yes sir!

Also telling that they thought internally that they could ignore the Rust Belt entirely and make up the needed votes in the major cities...showing more of the disdain they had for the people.

They just needed the votes, man. They cared not from whence they came.
 

Neoweee

Member
Oct 8, 2014
4,739
0
415
I don't think there's much of a turn, just actual room to breathe without getting dogpiled.

The queen squad funneled into a hole somewhere for the time being for people to actually have discussions for the first time in a good year or so.

The DNC seriously need to learn from this...losing this election is not excusable at all.

It's a turn. This is getting as bad as Reddit was during peak-Bernie.
 
Apr 30, 2009
35,156
0
0
I don't think there's much of a turn, just actual room to breathe without getting dogpiled.

The queen squad funneled into a hole somewhere for the time being for people to actually have discussions for the first time in a good year or so.

We should discuss how Bernie's core policy got rolled in Colorado by a 60 point margin, yes.

People are still considering the emails a "scandal" for some god forsaken reason.
 

LCGeek

formerly sane
Literally Trump's entire campaign was identity politics and saying that the other dude was a demon who should be in prison for pouring bleach over boxes of emails.

So what it works on his voters. elections have shown for dems that's not the winning strat. People have said it before, obama handing this woman and some of her campaign staffers an L before with the same issues at play should've been a huge warning.

DNC would do a lot to read and actually relate to their own who can come or those that might, they didn't. Trump exploited everything he could including populism to get where he got, she just wanted a gimmie.
 

Drewton

Member
Jun 23, 2014
3,094
0
430
This forum's turn on Clinton is absolutely unreal.

It really is.

So many of these people posting had a Clinton could do no wrong mentality. I was ridiculed months ago for thinking that Trump had a good chance of beating her and even for liking Bernie more.

Good to see the flaws being acknowledged now, though.
 

samn

Member
Jun 10, 2012
5,341
0
0
Of course it does, it's a bit of a matter in management. Depending and when, how and what you do, you can get different yields. For example, a few visits into the Rust Belts would've come cheap, but would've assured thousands that the democratic party didn't forget them. But stay in New York didn't get many more new votes. Neither did flying home every day.

A running politician visiting can encourage the people who already work for you and could sway undecided ones. It just has diminishing returns, since there are only so many people you can reach. That's why you need to plan how to spread your presence and how much.

edit: as someone else noted. The exact location matters too. Hillary was concentrated on urban areas, but deliberately left out rural ones. Her campaign thought she would pick up more people in the cities than she would lose in the country.

They should have spent all the money on flying home on polling in the final month instead.

Maybe she was worried about bedbugs.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.