Some people had a slightly higher opinion of her.
http://www.lennyletter.com/politics/a613/hillary-clinton-is-more-than-a-president/
This article is sidesplittingly funny. Had it been written about Kim, I think it would be rejected in Pyongyang as being too toadying.
So, how could Hillary Clinton lose to Trump?? Rather than blame everyone else - Comey, Russians, ‘weaponized information’ (i.e. Podesta’s honest, actual emails), and those Un-American Americans who somehow ‘guided’ how to be ‘weaponize’t that information - perhaps these points had something to do with it.
Hillary Clinton…
Backed Goldwater, a candidate who wanted to restore segregation, while Bernie Sanders was marching with Martin Luther King, Jr.
Pushed for fracking at home and abroad.
Defended Monsanto and child molesters in court.
Was on the board of WalMart for 6 years and said she was proud of everything they do.
Pushed for NAFTA and helped write the TPP and called it the “Gold Standard” of trade agreements.
Refused to release the transcripts of her speeches for large corporate donors (bribes in exchange for changing her positions).
Colluded with the DNC to cheat Bernie Sanders in the primaries.
Changed her position on single-payer healthcare as soon as she got donations from insurance companies and big pharma.
Referred to black people as predators.
Pushed for war in Bosnia, Libya, Iraq, Afghanistan, and Syria.
Got more in corporate donations than any Republican but claimed she was tough on WallStreet.
And that’s just the start. She has a long and mysterious trail of dead bodies of people who were going to testify against her - ask Seth Rich! She has a shady past, and was completely unelectable and every poll showed her either behind Trump or even with him while every post Sanders ahead. Even today, she is less popular than Trump. Truly, this woman is disliked and that’s not because of the Russians for God’s sake.
If Clinton actually cared about America and wanted to prevent Trump from being elected, she would have done the honorable thing, put her gigantic ego in check, and dropped out of the election rather than cheating Bernie Sanders. And if she was truly concerned about this country, she wouldn’t have tried to manipulate things to help Trump win the nomination.
I don’t really get this logic, because the people that voted for Trump voted for the alcoholic instead of the one enabling their behavior. What makes a voter say “This person is in bed with Trump-like figures, so we better vote for Trump instead.” The whole push for “Washington outsiders who will run the government like a business” is completely opposed to “Washington insiders enable big business,” and the only thread tying Trump and Bernie together is a sense of nationalism when it comes to employment - and Bernie is the exact kind of Washington insider being complained about, he’s been in the senate for a very long time. What you argue makes sense for why people didn’t vote or voted third party, but there was not some dramatic shift in voter turnout in places like Michigan to make that argument hold water for the actual election.
WI and PA have major issues with voter suppression, so that muddies the water as well as more people staying home compared to 2012. Even so you are talking extremely close races, not something like 2008.
Because the Rust Belt purged its voter rolls of minorities and California didn’t?
The problem is that ever since the day after the 2012 election (maybe before), the Clintons and their army of hangers-on took over the Democratic Party apparatus like a parasitic wasp takes over a caterpillar. The momentum was too great for any non-Hillary candidate to ever have a chance.
She and Obama in fact -started- the war in Libya and turned it into a quagmire. Every bit as culpable as GWB was for Iraq.
We don’t live in a ‘just’ world, or things would be different all around. I cant begin to explain why someone would vote for trump, I am not going to even try.
As someone who is politically active and engaged, the realization that I would have to hold my nose and vote for Clinton was the only sign I needed the election was lost. Most people are not politically engaged, at all. It is just something that happens every 4 years, and they might vote for a caricature if it inspires them in any way. But they are just as likely to sit home. This is the only way republicans win, ever, disenfranchisement and apathy.
I really wish she would have sold some type of vision as to where she wanted to head towards. She spent half the campaign pissing on visions of others in the party, then in the general her whole campaign was pretty much "trump is mean and I am better. "
And she was in no position to call trump on a lot of his creative personal finances, because she was accesing a lot of the same tax breaks and loopholes. So it came down to a personality contest where the average eligible voter once again went…meh.
1988 wasn’t even close. HW Bush won the popular vote by almost eight percentage points.
1992 was interesting because no candidate won a majority of the popular vote (thanks to Ross Perot), but Clinton won the Electoral College handily.
1996 wasn’t even close, either. Clinton beat Dole by eight and a half percentage points.
2000 was incredibly close, of course. It came down to a few thousand votes in Florida.
2004 was pretty close, as well. It came down to Ohio.
2008 wasn’t close.
2012 was closer.
2016 was very close. Not only did Hillary win the popular vote, but she lost the popular vote by a few thousand votes in three states.
Unlike past campaigns, a little bit here and a little bit there were likely enough to sway the result. A little disinformation from Russia could have tipped the scales.
In an election that close, everything “tipped the scales”.
Subtract Comey, and HRC would have likely won. Subtract the crooked incompetence of the DNC, and HRC would have likely won (the general, although perhaps not the primary). Subtract HRC, and any other Dem would have likely won.
Attempting to isolate one factor as the key is pointless.
Precisely my point: The “Hillary was doomed from the start” narrative is Monday morning quarterbacking, and because the election was so close, it can’t be said that she lost but for her negative qualities. You’re absolutely right that trying to single out one factor is pointless.
Disagree on “crooked” DNC. Disagree on the primary; she won that handily. Disagree on “any other Dem would likely have won.”
[quote=“middlewaytao, post:27, topic:101911”]
I really wish she would have sold some type of vision as to where she wanted to head towards. She spent half the campaign pissing on visions of others in the party, then in the general her whole campaign was pretty much "trump is mean and I am better. "
And she was in no position to call trump on a lot of his creative personal finances, because she was accesing a lot of the same tax breaks and loopholes. So it came down to a personality contest where the average eligible voter once again went…meh.
[/quote]I guess… maybe it’s just what I read and watched during the election but she explained her vision, the problem always seemed to be to say “the United States in not on the brink of destruction” and try to say we need realistic incremental improvement and that’s not an exciting message. And as far as negative goes, Trump was vile - I see almost everyone saying Clinton ran a campaign in the mud and that Trump preached hope, but Trump opened and closed every single speech and interview with insults to his opponents. His rally MCs chanted their meme sayings to fire the crowds up. The only hope he said was saying “I’ll give you the sun and the moon” in passing while then telling everyone that everything everywhere was shit. It’s a huge disconnect that I realize you don’t have an answer for (I can’t imagine anyone understands the social dynamics in play), but it’s an important topic nonetheless.
Clinton absolutely is not extremely charismatic, and she is very aggressive when it comes to national defense and US interests. But Trump’s audience simulataneously said Clinton was weak on terror an hated the military while saying she her aggressive moves on terror and military promotion would bring WW3. Meanwhile, Trump promised he would end ISIS with a magic boots-on-the-ground campaign in the Middle East, and suggested we should be using nukes many times on the campaign trail.
So just wandering how you (not specifically you) only believe the best of Trump and only believe the worst in Clinton at the same time is a big part of what happened in 2016, and a lot of the possibilities as to why are ugly truths many people have been dismissed in saying about the United States citing their personal experiences. That’s why I think about it.
Also, Clinton released her tax returns and did normal stuff but nothing strange. What loopholes are you talking about, or are you acuasing of shell corporations and Clinton Foundation conspiracies?
trump didnt inspire hope, but that base can be fed anything. These are the type of people just high on belonging to something more than their own sad lives. Why is everyone worrying about their opinions and winning their hearts? It’s like a 12% know nothing demographic.
The non voting-block did not show up for him either… if they do show up it is bad for conservatives. So yes, you give vision and hope. Being a good/professional administrator is not enough. I am not even going to get into the mess she was allowed to make as SOS. That impressed no one but Kissinger.
Yes, her 5 corporate charters in a Delaware tax haven and the like. All garden variety upper-middle waspy stuff, but when those numbers extrapolate into unfathomable degrees of wealth and no one is there on the high ground.
Polls typically show that about 20-25% of people consistently believe the Sun goes around the Earth. 63 million / 292 million = 21%. Funny that. These people can’t be convinced of anything, and no time should be spent trying to do so.
Except Trump’s base isn’t the only ones who voted for Trump, which is what I said to begin with - Trump saw a swell in support from voters, especially in the rust belt and especially in Michigan. He would not have been elected without it.
Bernie = Chaotic Good.
Trump = Chaotic Evil.
The American public wanted chaotic something this time round. They have pretty much had it with technocratic, nibble-around-the-edges policies. Can’t say I entirely disagree.
This topic was automatically closed after 5 days. New replies are no longer allowed.
